Uh oh, someone's going to jail.

Lad...

As much fun as this all is, posting them here wasn't a wise idea just yet.

I'm hoping the leaker will get us the videos soon. Oh and the Michelle Keegan images.

>>34503

The only ones I recognised were Kirsten Dunst and Jennifer Lawrence.

Some of them are pretty well produced, which is weird.

I knew you wouldn't let me down /x/

Kewl, she has an Xbox. I'll remember to bring my controller.

>>34505

Not OP, but why not?

>>34508
Legal issues and that. While J Law's people are trying to scare off people they claim they're going to prosecute anyone that posts them. Which of course means nothing but best stay on the safe side.
>>34506
Nice to see MEW in there. Can't recognise half of them there.

Really disappointed that some of the recognizable names have not been leaked and it's assumed the leaker either pissed off giving us the knowledge that a J Law sextape exists or got rumbled.

Impressive. How did it happen? I know this is /x/ and all, but an explanation as to how and why this happened would be great. Also; why would people save their nude pictures on the cloud service?

>>34510
icloud was hacked (through a basic exploit). That pretty much covers it.

The guy who got them stashed them for what seems a while and of course posted on the otherchan.

>>34511
oh and celebs did delete their images. They forgot icloud seems to keep a history of them.

>>34509

https://www.youtube.com/v/Z7-TTWgiYL4

>>34511
>>34512
Does that mean they are all going to sue Apple? Does anyone know who did the hacking?

JLaw isn't as fat as I thought. I think I seen that "It's Friday" girl on there too.

>>34514

>JLaw isn't as fat as I thought.

IKR, disappointing.

>>34514
It's just some lad on the otherchan. Nothing really known about his identity. He just turned up and posted images. As for apple, they'll likely ignore it and attempt to go after the leaker like the scarjo leaker.

That guy is in fucking prison for that stunt. IIRC it was a pretty big sentence too.

Anyone listen to shitty rock music in the early noughties? Well here are those memories tainted.

>>34517
Whose cock is that?

Ah I see they've taken the gallery down

Good thing I saved it half an hour ago. Please don't arrest me GCHQ lad

>>34517

This is how I know you are posting from an apple device.

When I save .gifs on iPad they don't animate on reposting either.

>>34520

How bloody dare you?!

I don't know why it's not animated, it was just like that when I downloaded it.

>>34517>>34520>>34521
I believe this is one of the fakes that slipped in. There's roughly a dozen fakes in the gallery.

Unf, this guy's hotter than the chick.

Come to think of it, I wish someone would leak some male celebrity nudes. Fassbender's cock I would very much like to see, oh yes.

>>34522

You keep telling yourself that, sk8rboi.

>>34523
I don't know who this is

Kristen Dunst seems cool. Like, I'm not even going to do anything rude while looking at this picture.

>>34524

Annie Leibovitz, obviously. It says so right there.

>>34503
Shit. I was too late. Reposts anywhere? Please? I really want Law.

>>34526

>>34527
The sexy kind of Law.

Makes me wonder what other personal information has been taken from this exploit. Although in fairness, its pretty bleeding obvious that you should expect cloud networks to be subject to breaches.

Here is hoping that some celebrity secrets about Hollywood were saved. I've always had a feeling that the conspiracy theory surrounding 'Eyes Wide Shut' would have allot of truth to it.

>>34505
>I'm hoping the leaker will get us the videos soon. Oh and the Michelle Keegan images.

Well he was demanding bitcoins for the leaks so I guess its down to people getting the money together.

>>34508
After the acting role of a lifetime, she's been busy.

>>34513
>>34517
I don't understand why you would want to have these images saved/sent. Who would Avril Lavigne be looking to show her sucking a cock to?

>>34528

You don't think Purps will be angry when he stops wanking wakes up, do you?

>>34526

I will drip feed you like the inactive fool you are.

>>34530
Jesus. I'll give you 9/10.

>>34531
Thank you uncle Ben. I'll be a good boy, I promise. Just give me more.

>>34533

Okay, just don't talk like that. GCHQlad could well be outside my window as I type this.

>>34530

If anything, this makes me love Karl Urban more.

>>34531
>>34534
Yum.

http://imgur.com/a/dawvL/noscript

>>34509
feverishly awaiting Cat Deeley

A slightly mistaken lady writing in the Guardian has compared the effect of this to child pornography.

It's also a very short article, leading me to believe she's mistaken being first with having the strongest argument.

>>34537
Link's dead already. Was this a re-upload of the previous one, or entirely new shots?

Leaker has been doxxed which I assume means that the fappening is now officially over.

You should have redacted the computer information Tristan!

>>34530
Audible Mirth. Well played.

>>34541
>spoiler
What is this and how would one do it?

Any good ones uploaded of Rhianna?

>>34540
http://imgur.com/a/hOjhu

Enjoy, took me hours to upload on this cancer BT calls broadband.

>>34539

Speaking about that. There seems to be a folder of Maisie Williams in 'The Fappening' download. Isn't she 17?

http://imgur.com/a/JBlMX#318

Few More

Despite proliferating many of the images in this thread, I've had a change of heart and now think I've partaken in quite an unpleasant thing. Many of the images are just couples doing couple stuff, and I can't claim to have had any great sexual thirst quenched by the revelation that the girl who played Jesse's junkie girlfriend has breasts.

I feel a bit of a shit actually.

>>34545
So Justin Bieber also got hacked.

>>34546

If you are stupid enough to take naked photos of yourself, you deserve to have them put on the internet for the world to see.

>>34549
Oh is that how you're justifying it to yourself? Those filthy sluts deserve it for wearing their provocative clothing!

>>34549
Not quite true mon frere.

I've taken many, many photos over the years of both myself and various young ladies in varying states of undress. Also got a good few vids of us fucking.

Difference between me and these idiot celebrities is I actually care about security so don't even enable javascript in my web browser, let alone upload private stuff to someone else's server.

These chumps are idiots for using cloud computing while not really understanding the security (or lack thereof) of it.

So yeah. The only pictures from my own personal "mammory lane" as I like to call it that have ever seen the internet are ones I posted myself, that had all identifying features removed. Basically one pic of us fucking that I covered the faces/genitals up. Nothing else has ever been seen online.

>>34549
Quoth the teenlad who's clearly never been in a relationship. Couples have been taking nudey photos of each other, and painting their muses/mistresses/wives/husbands nude, for hundreds of years. It's a natural aspect of human mating behaviour, the only difference is that since the 1980s the Internet has existed and made filesharing possible. Before that you had to actually go in and nick your mate's mums VHS of her getting pounded by Mr Jones. By your logic, anyone who has ever been recorded nude is an idiot. Elizabeth Siddal might've been a junkie, but she was also - at the end of the day - just a woman with a husband who she loved, and presumably liked banging. That's so common a situation it's banal.

These people aren't stupid. They're just boring humans like the rest of us - had you any actual experience with other people you'd probably understand this.

>>34542 ref reply to >>34541 understood now.

>>34552

No, mate. She wasn't a real junkie, she just played one in Breaking Bad.

>>34550
>filthy sluts
I wouldn't refer to them as that, it's just plain rude.

>>34551
But you have these files on a phone or a laptop. If these things were stolen then the risk of them getting leaked still exists.

>>34552
2/10. Calm down, Jennifer.

>>34555
>But you have these files on a phone or a laptop. If these things were stolen then the risk of them getting leaked still exists.
Wrong. All the files involved are stored on my desktop. For me to lose them, someone would have to break into my house and either steal my computer or copy them off that way.

I don't think there have been many stories of private pictures being leaked that way, have there?

>>34549

If you are stupid enough to take naked photos of yourself, you *should expect no sympathy if they are* put on the internet for the world to see.

>>34509
I only know a few those names. 99% of them are reality show "stars", I'm guessing?

Thing is, celeb sex tapes etc have been leaking on and off for years. It's only the sheer amount of stuff at once that's causing any bother.

It's a shame the leaker got greedy and try to get people buy bitcoins for images.

Now I have to live with the knowledge that there are several sex tapes out there of A-list celebrities and I can't see them.

>>34562

Yeah, usually people who steal photographs of the intimate moments from peoples lives are so generous.

>>34556
When I used to work at a computer and phone repair shop, people used to bring in their computers for repairs, and most of the time there would be nude pictures and sometimes the odd video saved on the HDD. It is weird, knowing people so intimately when they don't know about it. "You filthy bitch, he stuck a carrot up your arse, and now you are here haggling for a fucking cheaper service, maybe I should give you a carrot." The best were the extremely religious people and their tons and tons of porn.

I start having existential crisis and anxiety issues when I see stuff like this. I feel like I am going to die broke, depressed and alone. I want to join the army so that I can die without having to kill myself.

>>34564
When the Snowden leak surfaced, did you nod supportively thinking that's how people in charge of IT systems ought to behave or are you a hypocrite as well as a cunt?

>>34566
I don't understand. You might have me confused with someone else.

>>34567
So you didn't just make a post where you gleefully admitted rifling through people's private data without permission?

>>34564
People who need their computers repaired before a simple google search and prompt fix, deserve their shit to be rifled through.

>>34570
>People who can't securely communicate over a network deserve to have their every packet analysed and stored forever.

>>34565

When yous see naked celebrities you develop on urge to join a punishment battalion and throw yourself on a machine gun nest?

>>34566
Not that guy but having worked in a little IT shop before now it's actually surprisingly hard to avoid invading people's privacy when you're dealing with their half-broken computers. If you're going to backup the important bits out of an old Windows profile you'll end up seeing things, filenames if nothing else.

That said, I never saw any home-made porn as far as I can recall; even if I'd been given to snooping around for nudes I wouldn't have had much opportunity, the work tended to be flat out. I do remember stumbling on some guy's porn stash, ~100GB of it saved in a folder called "porn" on his desktop. Can't really miss that.

The only thing I ever saved from computers in my care was music, which I think is pretty benign as trust issues go. The ones with anything worth listening to were few and far between.

>>34571
Why not? Why don't you go to bed with your front door wide open, mate?

>>34569
Why would I not do it, if I can get away with it?

>>34573
Or maybe suicide-by-cop. I don't know mate.

>>34563
But nobody wins

The leaker is getting caught thus losing the money in the process and we don't get our naughty photos.

>>34575
The house would get cold.

>>34579
In the summer...

only one pic? I need more of this slag lads

(A good day to you Sir!)

>>34538
Meow.

>>34586

See, I just can't find that arousing. It's just a couple being all lovely together, and their dog.

Their sexy, sexy dog...

>>34587

Didn't even notice the dog.

christ that dog looks depressed

>>34590
He's a dog, with a Cat as his master.

>>34586
From what it seems, is that her bra is an improper fit. I'm no expert, but those pressure marks look painful.

>>34592
Or maybe they just had a heavy session of bondage/BDSM.

>>34589
Who even is it?

Oh boy, I just saw the Internet Hate Machine itself flash up on the BBC news channel.

Poor m00t, he just wanted to talk about anime with other English speakers.

>>34595

They called it a "photo sharing website" too. I guess that's a roundabout way of saying imageboard.

>>34595
>>34596

RISQUÉ PHOTOGRAPHS.

STATES OF UNDRESS.

>>34598
Mirth. Mainstream news channels are weird.

>>34601

Well they're hardly going have Rico announce "Kate Upton disproves all 'T and no A' myth with sperm string covered post-shag pics", are they?

I mean, I wish they would, but it's just not going to happen.

Oh dear, this is whole non-story is quite pissing me off.

Several news outlets claim this is a "sex crime", and now the hacker is being hounded by the FBI, this is exactly the sort of shit that the tumblrites love.

Why isn't anyone directing their attention to the services that failed to provide adequate security against this sort of thing? And what kind of inept cunt do you need to be, not to know that the barrier between the internet and public is so thin?

hello cunts,

look: http://www.buzzfeed.com/rachelzarrell/jennifer-lawrence-ariana-grande-picture-leak

That might be my email adress.
So it might mean i was the first to drop the leaks.
Or it might mean im the biggest hacker since hitler.

Fuck you im out.

>>34609
Who cares?

>>34603
Can you explain why this isn't a sex crime?

>>34603
Why do people go out of their way to avoid reading a representative sample of media coverage and then indignantly question why the media is ignoring the angle they're interested in?

My country is banned from /x/

Luckily /*/ lets me expand and reply.

I have such a thing for celebs, I can bash one out to Jennifer Aniston pokies (that I've bashed one out to a million times before) faster than I can to any form of porn, I think it's because my first outings onto the internet were to robbscelebs, I still miss that site. RIP Robb.

>>34611
They're saying anyone that views a sexy image without their consent is equivalent to rape which includes all sex images, not just the celeb leak.

Which is quite mad because on that logic I am now among the worst rapists ever. I've been doing it since 1999 since I was 11. I'm a monster. My god all those people I've killed in video games too. I am the worst person ever.

>>34614

SHOCKER: VILE DEN OF RAPISTS DISCOVERED ON THE INTERNET, PERVY YOUNG MEN BASED IN SHEDS ALL ACROSS THE UK HAVE BEEN RAPING WOMEN SINCE THE AGE OF 11
>Anyone may be a rapist now... We urge anyone with suspicions to come forward to the police anonymously. If your son, brother, husband or father is spending hours in a shed, he could be a rapist.

>>34614
>They're saying anyone that views a sexy image without their consent is equivalent to rape
Sorry, who is saying this? Link please.

Also you haven't answered my original question: why is this not a sex crime?

>>34614
I doubt very many people are saying it's equivalent to rape, but they may well be saying it's wrong to view the pictures and the mere act of viewing them further victimises the people depicted. And it's an argument a great number of people have accepted for a long time when it's applied to child pornography.

>>34614
Oh and one article said (paraphrased) "the users of 4chan can talk about evil things without repercussions". The context of that was not just on the celeb images but just in general (not even malicious threats, just general shitposting). These people are quite mad.

>>34616
Just general twitter and comment nonsense from the general public. There's a few people on a buzzfeed article comparing it to rape. But you know, that's buzzfeed.

I apologise for implying that actual journalists are comparing it to rape. In other news video game journalist threatens people who disagree with his opinion on the gamer gate thing with swatting. I'm not particularly a fan of both journos and people with strong opinions jumping on the bandwagon right now. Sage for that reason as I'm just rambling on something off topic.

>>34616
>why is this not a sex crime?

How can viewing an image of a nude person be a sex crime?

What if these images weren't leaked to the world, and only some neckbeard perv viewed them without the celebs knowing - would it still be a sex crime then? It only seems like one because they are making it to be this heinous thing, that, from their own irresponsibility - should make it seem like a great injustice. Fuck them. Don't put your images in a very compromising place - don't take them at all if needs be, if so, then for fucks sake, store them safely.

>>34617 The difference between this and child pornography is that it's not photos of suffering and anguish. It's a fucked up situation, but not child pornography

>>34621
A photo of a naked kid sleeping taken for sexual purposes is still child pornography. There's no requirement for suffering or anguish to be a part of it.

>>34620
>How can viewing an image of a nude person be a sex crime?
See >>34617

>>34622 You're forgetting that it isn't a picture of a child we're discussing here. The picture was captured with what appears to be full consent gained from a mentally competent adult. I'll happily admit it's a moral grey area, but painting anyone who views those images as Pete Townsend doesn't make sense.

>>34620
So you're saying that specifically the viewing of these images is not a crime? Are you therefore agreeing the original distribution of these images is a crime?

>>34624
You're blurring the issue, intentionally or otherwise. What's up for debate is whether it is a crime, not how much of a monster the criminal is.

>>34624
>The picture was captured with what appears to be full consent gained from a mentally competent adult
I think it's fairly obvious that the widespread distribution of those images goes beyond that consent.

I don't really see it as a "moral grey area". Looking at nude pictures of someone who doesn't want you to see them naked is definitely not a moral thing to do, at least to me.

I can't fathom any way viewing an image of ny sort can be considered immoral, frankly, especially if they're out there in the public domain, as they are. Moving them from the private to public domain may be immoral but when it's out it's out, whoever looking at it doesn't change anything.

>>34626
They probably don't want you to see their grubby Corsa either but if a neighbour cut their hedg e down it doesn't make seeing it immoral.

Putting pics of yourself with your tits out is like putting confidential information in a bird box down the park. The general public has no idea what any of these words like 'cloud' means, nor that they are relying on third party security to keep their shit secure, it's just ignorance.

>>34625
>Are you therefore agreeing the original distribution of these images is a crime?


The illegal access of private data, yes, that is a crime. Distribution? Yes, I'd say is a morally wrong thing to do. Not as bad as the first, but still a crime.

Viewing pictures of adult women, no, it's not. Again, morally dubious, and that's at the viewers discretion. I don't particularly glean any pleasure from looking at these pictures, (most of these bints are slightly above average), besides Lawrence, I don't know any of the other ones.

CP on the other hand is a morally abhorrent act, viewing it with intent of deriving sexual pleasure is equally bad. It creates a demand for it, which is how it works. I've unintentionally stumbled across CP on /b/ and other shitholes on funchan, and I was repulsed immediately.

Lets agree that viewing nudes from private collections is a cuntish thing to do - but certainly not "rapist" or whatever tumblerite buzzword is favoured.

>>34629
But in viewing stolen pictures of adult women, you're creating a demand for them (or so your logic goes), so therefore viewing the pictures "is equally bad" as stealing them.

It's not that your repulsion to CP makes you receptive to these arguments and your predilection for adult women makes you resistant to applying the same arguments even handedly, is it?

>>34630 And yet here you are posting beneath a naked picture of Jennifer Lawrence. The ironing is delicious.

I'm fairly sure that the net fappiness (gigidy) of literally millions of neckbeards and teenlads worldwide outweighs the temporary embarassment of a handful of successful celebrities. Ends justify means and all.

Besides, their beauty is the main reason they're famous, or at least a necessary contribution - how is it morally worse for people to exploit their beauty than it is for them to exploit society with their beauty (ah capitalism)?

I can't help but wonder what kind of strange new world we are creating for ourselves with these smartphones that we now have permanently in our pockets.

Rightly or wrongly, we are recording more and more information about ourselves, and it rarely stays private forever. It could be that in as little as 5 years time it will be normal to have your nudes posted on your facebook page.

>>34635

If anything I think a world where gossip is pointless and unrewarded would be much better than the one we live in now.

>Hey have you heard, Stacey fucked a guy last night right in the club toilets, what a sl-
>Yeah, I know, it was on her GoogleTubeFaceBook(TM)(C)(R)
>YEAH I KNOW RIGHT WHAT A S-
>Old news. Nobody cares. You did it yourself last week.

http://thefappen.in/albums/

have fun boys.

>>34637

Apart from Cat Deeley and Kirsten Dunst, I don't recognise any of those girls.

>>34638

not even JLaw?

on the subject of dunst does anyone else think she's taken it pretty well? just shrugging it off

>>34639
Well she has had her tits out in films so it's not surprising.

>>34638
There's a picture of Avril Lavigne sucking a cock I saw in one set that got released. Might be in this one too.

>>34641
It's fake m8

https://www.youtube.com/v/3TMcUHo5zZQ

So, now I've seen Aubrey Plaza's vag.

most hilarious wank ever

>>34642
Yep. It's her opening a beer with her teeth and downing it in one.

Yeah I have the tour DVD from years ago.

The hacker is racist and sexist. Why hasn't he leaked pictures of men or non-white actors?

>>34645
>>34642
You fucking bastards. Why couldn't you have let me believe?

>>34647
I'm sorry lad. I'm wanting to see her tits too.

I wonder if it was Deryck Whibley Wobbly or Mr Bland who took them?

>>34646
Please stop calling him a hacker. He basically just guessed their passwords.

Apparently it is now child abuse because one of the pictures is of a girl before her 18th. You all looked at CP, you cunts.

>>34656
And apparently terrorism
http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/09/online-abuse-leaked-nudes-and-revenge-porn-nothing-less-terrorism-against-women

>>34656
That was that American olympic gymnast.

If anything she should be done for producing CP which is a bigger crime than distribution or possession, your honour.

Or it could be a clever way to get them removed off the internet and she was in fact over 18 when taking the photos. I mean if I was a woman that would be my excuse but then again I wouldn't take nude photos of myself knowing well enough that they will get out unless I never put them on the net and I physically destroy the device that captured them

>>34657
CP, rape and terrorism? They're really going all out on this.

It's nice to know that simply viewing an image of J Law's jubblies is equivalent to being in ISIS. Oh I play video games too so according to gamers gate I'm a double terrorist.

>>34659

Don't forget rapist.

>>34634

>Besides, their beauty is the main reason they're famous, or at least a necessary contribution

Nope. Jennifer Lawrence is cute, but she's nothing special. Being 'not horrific to look at' is a requirement, but most of the populace fulfil that. It's mainly acting talent and charisma. It's like the Pornstar fallacy I made up, that being that if a girl is in porn she's automatically considered less naturally attractive than a girl who's less attractive but portrays quirky, sexy characters in films. Lots of celebrities aren't objectively above a 7, but their presence makes them more attractive and lots of people simply don't look through it.

>>34661

Sasha Grey is an example of a Pornstar that is famous even by Hollywood standards. She has been given awards by the porn industry, been in shit films, voiced video game characters. She has been on talk shows, although as a Pariah and the subject of derision and scorn by the host.

She is more attractive than 70-80% of the women in hollywood or elsewhere in the media, music industry, etc. You'll never see her in a FHM top 100 though, though they are happy to do articles about her.

Who would have thunk it, eh? Nudey mags suffer from political manoeuvring too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29061358

Well then...

>>34669
Whoa. They managed to tame the monster.

>>34670
>Although this might have some impact on regular users of the site who maintain an account, it is not clear what effect the policy change will have on the many others who post material anonymously and supply no identifying information.

It's weird how the internet changes. This statement reeks of "wait. How can they post without using their name?"

I remember back in the 90s I was to never to talk to strangers in real life. In 1999 that extended to the internet. Then in the early to mid 2000s I was told never to put my personal information out there. Now it's encouraged to put my personal info out there publicly as it can lead to several disadvantages in life.

>>34671
*lead to several disadvantages in life IF I DON'T

>>34661
>Lots of celebrities aren't objectively above a 7
Fuck off with that shite, mate.

>>34673
What, ranking people's looks out of ten? I vaguely recall some idiot objecting to this on these boards in the past as well, was it you?

>>34674

I'm sure it was your use of the word objectively, as it is ridiculous. It's an opinion you and others share, not an objective fact.

Stuff like that annoys .gs at large.

>>34674
How is it objectively? Are you dense? You fucking moron.

>>34675
>>34676
Your remarks would make sense if you were addressing >>34661, but you're not.

>>34674
>What, ranking people's looks out of ten?
Yeah, that and the "objectively" thing. Both a bit daft.

>I vaguely recall some idiot objecting to this on these boards in the past as well, was it you?
I don't think so.

Looks are a Gaussian, lads. Never feel bad about saying a girl is a 5, 70% of them are.

I hate myself for actually having had this conversation in real life.

>>34670
nah, all the hardcore /b/tards will just up sticks and move to 7chan and the like instead. trying to control the internet is like fighting a hydra. cut off one head another springs up in it's place. and they can't arrest literally everyone who's had a peek at lawrences tits which makes enforcement of any kind of judgement ultimately impossible.

kirsten dunst had the right idea- she just shrugged it off and carrie don. the more fuss gets created the longer this goes on.

>>34675

Yeah my bad (I'm >>34661). I guess a better way to put it is, if you took them out of a celebrity context, a lot of people might not give them a second look, but because of their fame and the image projected, they come off as more attractive than they are. My use of 'objectivity' her was meant to relate to looking at them out of the context of them being famous and recognisable and because you saw their bum in a film once.

As for the '7/10', firstly it's obviously not a finely tuned system but if you think of it as 'Most people seem to consider her prettier than her' and so on...it's a little bit arbitrary but that's obvious, I mean you can't completely break down a person like that but it suffices for quick examples.

>>34680

>trying to control the internet is like fighting a hydra

Of course, because you've fought a Hydra, and would know, right? Bullshitter.

>>34693

Wont no wot hit im.

>>34693

How do you know he hasn't fought a hydra?

I wonder why 4chan has taken that stance? It can't be for moral reasons as they've never bothered about ex-gf or other stolen pictures being posted in their thousands.

>>34699

It's a way to avoid legal trouble while operating almost entirely as normal. By the time a DMCA takedown notice can be issued most 4chan threads have 404'd.

>>34503

Cracking body for her though. Well worth a shuffle.

So the washington post did an article on a man who shared the images on reddit. Not the hacker or the leaker. They acknowledged 4chan (written as 4Chan like every other news outlet for some reason) was where the images were originally posted.

they dug into his entire history. The article in short was just a LOOK AT THIS LOSER as they mentioned his aspergers, his inability to secure a loan and how many odd jobs he has. Some of the investigation was actually quite disturbing that they go to the lengths of a pap (assuming washington post isn't already a pap site). The comments are how you'd expect a daily mail comment section are to be like.

http://pastebin.com/hQw03X8i
Here's the article in a pastebin because I'm not entirely comfortable giving them extra hits. The article rubs me in the wrong way. I'm not sure why, it just seems far too slimy in that I don't know if "John" deserved it.

>>34702
>The Post is not revealing “John’s” real name, or accounts linked to his real name, out of concern for his privacy.
Nothing to do with their cross-referencing not amounting to anything other than something like slander until his identity is proven in a court of law then.

>>34503
She would be 10/10 if she were laying eggs in that picture.

There's more out.

>>34704
Dog eggs?

Does anyone else remember the BBC news article that some authority is creating a cloud based archive of childporn, supposedly to make it easier to identify 'models' new to the scene?

>>34742
No, that's just the Cabinet putting all their private collections together.

>>39902
Well worth the bump m7.

>>39903
I'm quite happy for that image to be at the top of /*/ again.

>>39904
I'm not happy to be reminded of this massive creepfest.

>>39905
It is aesthetically pleasing though. The softness of the light, the minimal contrast between the flesh tones and the beiges, her posture. I like it.

>>39906
*tips fedora*

(A good day to you Sir!)

>>39905
You mean to tell me that you don't find her sexually attractive?

>>39908
JLaw? Yeah she's pretty hot. Don't see what that has to do with looking at her private photos though.

Have you lot seen Justin Bieber's cock? Some paparazzi took a picture of Justin when he was walking about naked on some resort.

It's massive.

>>39910
How's the lighting?

>>39910
Unless he was walking around with a stiffy I'm not sure how you can really tell, nor why you would want to.

>>39910
That's what counts as massive? Score!

>>39913
Mate, I'm really fat, so my bestmate looks like a turtle head fighting to stick its head out of all the fat enveloping it.

>>39911
It was taken in daylight. Natural light and all.

>>39912
Spoken like a lad with a tiny cock. It's okay mate. No need to get sour over Bieber's fat, massive cock.

Imagine that. Justin fucking Bieber. The guy who was the butt of every gay and effeminate joke, has a massive fucking cock. Jesus.

>>39914
My other half's reaction upon being shown the photo was "He's just gone up in my estimation."

>>39915
Be honest, how do you feel about that?

>>39914

>Imagine that. Justin fucking Bieber. The guy who was the butt of every gay and effeminate joke, has a massive fucking cock. Jesus.

Not being funny but I've never seen what that has to do with anything.

I'm a long haired skinny twink boi type boi type and I still sport a schlong like a racehorse. Even if we're talking about gay blokes, what is there to stop gays having big cocks? All the better to plough tiny neg arseholes.

Yeah, it really isn't that big...

>>39916
Eh, I'm alright with it. I've no worries over my own manhood and she's seen/heard me perv on enough people.

>>39914

Are effeminate gays exempt from having massive cocks?

>>39920
Exempt no, but my purely academic research indicates it's less common. YMMV.