khankrumthebulgar

I wish Paul's three girlfriends the best of luck, says Heather Mills in first TV taunt since divorce

Heather Mills today launched an astonishing tirade against Sir Paul McCartney, accusing him of having three girlfriends.

Ms Mills declared on live television this morning: "I wish all the girls the best of luck. Better them than me."

In her first interview since winning a £24.3million divorce settlement from the ex-Beatle, Ms Mills vowed to continue her legal fight to get full transcripts of her divorce hearing made public.

Scroll down for more... {R}

She said she was still fighting with McCartney over their divorce, and petitioned the judge "every day" because she feels the extracts of the judgment published were "one-sided".

In a rare moment of self-awareness, Ms Mills admitted: "People love me or hate me."

However, she blamed the negative press attention on the fact that she "upset the apple cart" with her campaigns for "truthful journalism and the landmine treaty and the dog and cat fur campaign".

She went on to boast about pouring water over the head of Sir Paul's lawyer Fiona Shackleton at the end of the High Court case and claimed she had done it to "cleanse and baptise" her.

Ms Mills, speaking from Las Vegas where she is judging the Miss USA beauty contest, was asked if she had a new man in her life.

She dodged the question and inside said of Sir Paul: "I think he's got three different girlfriends."

Scroll down for more...

Sir Paul has been pictured on holiday in the Caribbean in recent days with US heiress Nancy Shevell. Since splitting from Ms Mills, he has also been linked to actress Rosanna Arquette and former Olympic horsewoman Tanya Larrigan.

Miss Mills also described her divorce battle with Sir Paul, 65, as a "David versus Goliath" battle where she was "fighting the Establishment".

Her comments, made on GMTV, will risk the further wrath of Mr Justice Bennett, the divorce judge who accused her of being a "less than candid" witness, living in a land of "make-believe".

She accused the judge, one of Britain's most respected, of being "one-sided" in his damning judgment which left her reputation in tatters.

She said: "I can't talk about anything other than the judgment but the only two things he said was 'explosive' and 'volatile'."

She claimed: "I was never once explosive and volatile and he was actually referring to my appearance on your programme so that's the bit that he meant but he didn't actually expand on that.

"And the other thing he said was 'make believe' because I'd said we lived together before we were married and he said that was make believe.

"Most people know we lived together before we married and what he should have said is 'I don't believe that' and that's it."

Scroll down for more...

The comments on the case could fall foul of Mr Justice Bennett's gagging order, issued at the end of the case preventing any of the parties revealing further details about the marriage or the divorce case.

Ms Mills, 40, a former glamour model, may now find herself in contempt of court.

It is understood that Mrs Shackleton has already fired off at least one warning letter to Ms Mills's legal team over comments made in the Evening Standard last week by her lawyer David Rosen.

She explained said she poured a carafe of water over Mrs Shackleton after claiming the divorce lawyer had muttered something under her breath at the end of the hearing during arguments over whether the divorce judgement should be made public.

Ms Mills said today: "The trial happened, it finished, I was thanked by the judge, and that was the end of that.

"I went back to the court, and Paul's lawyers and him argued to have the judgment put out with all my daughter's private information and our private information on this one-sided judgment.

Scroll down for more...

"And Mrs Shackleton said something under her breath so I cleansed and baptised her. I thought she looked fantastic � I thought it did her the world of good and now I'm getting lots of offers to restyle the hair of women of her age."

She added: "I'm fighting to be able to clear my name. I don't need to talk about Paul. You've seen what I've been through over the past year. I just want my daughter to know the truth."

Ms Mills also revealed that she plans to spend more time in America in the future, although she ruled out moving there permanently.

"You know I've always wanted to live here but I've always said that I can't live here because I want to keep my daughter near her father," she said. "But you know there's plenty [of] holidays; kids have four or five months holiday a year so whenever my daughter's with her dad on holiday I pop over here and do my charity work."


from the Daily Mail in the UK

Leader
The Guardian, Tuesday April 8 2008
Article history
fter Patti Solis Doyle and Geraldine Ferraro, Mark Penn is the third senior adviser to Hillary Clinton to step down or be demoted. Each time one of the praetorian guard falls, more questions are asked about the judgment of the commander-in-chief. It was Mr Penn's big idea to play on Mrs Clinton's managerial competence and her experience under fire. He was the author of the most famous advertisement of the campaign, asking voters who they would like in the White House at 3am when the red phone rings. He was the brains behind the strategy which contrasted her battle-hardened experience (even if she had to embellish her story of facing snipers in Bosnia) with Barack Obama's untested hand at the tiller.

Both Hillary and Bill Clinton trusted Mr Penn to the point of being blind to his failings. The event that propelled his demotion was a classic conflict of interest. As the chief executive of a major PR firm for whom he continued to work, Mr Penn advised the Colombian government on how to secure congressional approval for a free trade deal. This was exactly the sort of trade agreement that Mrs Clinton is backing away from as she approaches a crucial primary in Pennsylvania. Such states are sensitive to shedding jobs abroad. The damage is all the greater because Mr Penn did not go immediately. He tried to ride out the storm created when the Wall Street Journal reported that he had met the Colombian ambassador with an admission that the meeting was "an error of judgment". It took a union coalition against Mr Penn to force his eventual demotion.

This was a disaster waiting to happen, and it speaks volumes about Mrs Clinton's mindset. Mr Penn is a figure from the mid-90s who kept Bill Clinton's campaign fighting for the centrist vote. He did the same for Mrs Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000. Both husband and wife owe Mr Penn a debt of gratitude for the quality of his past advice, but neither appreciates how much of a liability he has become today. Mr Penn's innate conservatism, which can be seen in anything from economics to Mrs Clinton's refusal to renounce her vote in the support of the Iraq war, is anathema in a post-Bush era where conservatism is discredited. What Democrat voters want, and arguably what America wants too, is not a reminder of how far right a centrist president can be pushed, (the leitmotif of the Clinton/Blair era) but how much distance a new president can put between him or herself and Mr Bush, possibly the worst president in US history. America's desire for a fresh start is so obvious it is hard to underestimate, but Hillary and Bill Clinton have been making a good stab at it, propelled by the need to re-fight the battles of the past.

Mr Obama has drawn level with Mrs Clinton in the latest opinion polls in Pennsylvania, and it is now possible to imagine him winning the state, which only a month ago was hers for the taking. If Mrs Clinton wins Pennsylvania on April 22 and North Carolina and Indiana on May 6, she will be entitled to battle on, forcing the superdelegates to make the decision that the voters could not quite make themselves. But if she falters again, and the day she will know will be May 7, it will surely be time to bring an end to one of the most fractious Democratic nominations in living memory.

For after that point, Mrs Clinton will not be able to hide behind the rationale that she is testing the electability of her Democrat opponent. The storm over the fiery sermons of Jeremiah Wright produced one of the best and bravest speeches Mr Obama made. But that test has been passed. Other stumbling blocks can be created but it is going to look increasingly as if the Clintons are doing John McCain's work for him. Refusing to admit defeat, if the next three states produce an indecisive result, will have nothing to do with the big picture. It will have everything to do with a refusal to admit that the Clinton era is over, for both of them.

In a Brunette Wig ala Britney Spears the amputee Pirate of the UK and former Beattle Sir Paul McCartney is looking for a piece of Real Estate in NY. She is despised in the UK thoroughly and mistakenly believes she can have a fantastic career in TV in the US. Wow is she delusional. This is reported today on www.tmz.com the celebrity site, and on the Daily Mail's Femail link. She is trying to keep a low profile.

While at the same time preparing to trash her ex Husband and try to get more money out of the UK Courts. She also wants to Trash the Judge there. Maybe his Honor should throw her Skanky butt in the Pokey. It may bring her around to some reality.

My favorite though is Hilliary Clinton who is lecturing the US Citizenry on Fiscal Matters and is floating a Universal Healthcare scenario. Has not paid the Health Insurance payments for two months for her employees in her Campaign Staff. This is typical Clinton behavior. Also financial records reveal her and Bill have since his leaving the White House made $50 Million. Including some money from a Cayman Island Corporation where Bill is a Partner. The Cayman Islands are a paradise for hiding money for the Super Rich. And a Tax Haven. So on the one hand they rail against the Wealthy and Super Rich, while taking the money of the Wealthy on the other hand. Who is funding them?????????

The media is not asking these hard questions. Hilliary it has been revealed was fired from the Watergate Investigation for creating a fake Legal Brief. And she tried to deny President Nixon the right to counsel. Violating his Constitutional Rights. She lied about her actions and was fired. It turns out that Hilliary's ethical and moral lapses in judgement go back to the early days of her being a Lawyer. And apparently nothing has changed. Bill was disbarred for "Perjury and lying under oath".

Christopher Hitchens pointed this out and the Left leaning Media fails to bring up this salient fact.
It is very disheartening to be an American looking for a White Knight in this Election, and that is not a comment on Race Folks. For anybody who does not know about me. My Son in Law is African American. He and my Daughter have three boys. I have a niece who has two Boys and her Children's Father is Black.

We are becoming more diverse as a Nation.

My purpose for starting this blog was to post my thoughts relative to the current Culture and Gender War. Of note is the settlement of the Paul McCartney and his now ex wife, Heather Mills. It seems that the Judge released his 58 page findings or Judgment on the behavior of Ms. Mills. She has been savaged in the press in the UK. And in the US has retained the Feminist Lawyer Gloria Allred to carry her torch. She wanted payment for example for a House already paid for. An annual Wine budget of $72,000, she doesn't drink. And she got a fraction of what she demanded. On the way out she poured a Container of Water on the Head of Paul's Lawyer.

She has posted a video from several years ago of Hilliary Clinton singing her praises and Virgin Airline's CEO. But they are not current videos. And we have no statements from the two Celebs about their current views on Ms. Mills. Who has now hired Forensic Accountants to flush out "Hidden Assets" she claims Sir Paul owns to fleece him for more money.

She has proven to be her own worst enemy. As to myself I have posted recently on Yahoo Answers. Which seems to be an endless repetition of the same lame questions on Gender. Almost like a High School debate. And several posts apparently angered Feminists who had my postings deleted. Free Speech is not allowed unless it is Feminist approved. No surprises there at all.

While responding to an attack on Pandagon.net of Marc Rudov of the Men's No Nonsense Guide to Women. I was slandered again by Ginmar the Angry Feminist. And this slander that I endorsed or approved of the Rape of my oldest Daughter was repeated. And has been left up by Amanda Marcotte. Who apparently approves of the abuse of a Woman who was Raped as a Girl. I sent two emails to Amanda Marcotte and to Ginmar with no responses. Slander of Men's Rights Advocates is acceptable to Feminists.

Amanda who claims to be a Rape Victim herself. Has a strange sense of Justice. By allowing a Woman who was Raped to be abused by Ginmar. So Rape apparently is only a crime if it happens to a Woman who is a Feminist. That is the message Amanda and Ginmar are making.

Ms. Robin Steele self proclaimed Men's Rights Activist has posted on her blog she is on a mission. I hope she finds life on Mars. The whole drama connected with her bizarre rants, insults of a variety of Men and Women who embrace the Men's Movement reminds me of an attempt to recon the Enemy. Or the possibility however bizarre that she is an unhinged individual with an axe to grind. Here comes a shock. I sincerely no tongue in check here. Hope she finds peace. The threats to sue, attempts to stifle Free speech are very strange indeed. Her link to Ginmar who has even been banned from Feminists sites is truly weird.

A NY Lawyer has filed an action in Federal Court challenging the Violence Against Women's Act as discrimination, IMBRA is a part of that as well. IF it is over turned. Feminists will howl and scream. But it is the worst piece of Feminist Pork to come down the pike in many years. I have taken to posting recently on Yahoo Answers. As I am not interested in posting only in Men's Rights blogs. As they can become Echo chambers. The problem I find is the usual insults of Men, and shaming language.

What is unhinging US Feminists is this. Women cannot make Men love them, want them, want to Marry them, or have Children with them. Men are increasingly rejecting Women even as Sexual partners. As the opportunity costs associated with them is too high. This has been reflected on the articles about Male behavior not being what it should be according to Kay Hymowitz of City Journal for one. Men are simply doing what Feminists have done for years. Put their interests ahead of the other party. And are saying NO in record numbers. That two Family Counseling Researchers are now seeing a Strike by men on having Sex with Women. Should come as a Major wake up call to Women.

They have seriously overplayed their hand. When Men are rejecting Women for Sex. They are in serious trouble with Men. Wow Men don't want to get horizontal with Women, whodda Thunk that could happen?
Men pulling a Fred Reed and heading to Ole Messico where the LBFMachines live. Couldn't happen to more deserving Women.