39 Responses to “The first picture looks like she needs to …”

Milfy Milf*Brea says:
May 18, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Wow serisouly its not like shes showing off he naked body shes still covered up. All you haters are turning it into more than it is. You guys are just a bunch of jelous people honestly grow up. There are bigger problems in our world and this is the crap you guys like to talk about? are you serious? its pathetic people like you why our world is the way it is…
Reply
mary says:
May 5, 2008 at 3:05 pm
tooken?
good job Nishin.
check your grammar before trying to make a point or else no one will take you seriously darling.
Reply
Nishin says:
May 3, 2008 at 1:48 pm
i think that milet cyrus taking these pics is totally a bad example on little kids who are her big fans
i for one am NOT a hanna montana or a miley cyrus fan!! and the people who think that these pics are ok, NO THEY ARE NOT!! alot of little girls are wanna be’s and if they see that, they might want to do that sort of stuff, and if i was that girls mom or dad i would have slapped her across the face and tooken her out of that place, it wouldn’t matter about the gossip that would spread around, this is much MUCH worse!!! and just to add…
i don’t think that miley cyrus is pretty!
Reply
mark says:
May 3, 2008 at 7:24 am
I am a father of 3 daughters. As soon as they said we need you to take your top off, the shoot would have ended. It’s not an issue of art or not.
Do people really need to see her in provocative poses.
True she is actractive for her age, but you do not need to see her partailly clothed to make that point.
REMEMBER PEOPLE SHE IS 15
Reply
Jacob denton says:
April 30, 2008 at 10:58 am
Looks like there incesting
Reply
chris bann says:
April 30, 2008 at 6:52 am
the picture was beautiful whoever said it was improper is a fool the girl is pretty and it shows good taste good for you miley people are just jealous
Reply
Pooua says:
April 30, 2008 at 12:55 am
“Vanity Fair pictures showing Miley without clothes on.”
I have yet to see anything that supports the statement that Miley posed without clothes. As far as I have found, she always had something covering her private areas.
Reply
prediter says:
April 29, 2008 at 1:27 pm
well well let se what all the fuss is about! first of all thoes pictures are not even expliced!!!!! and as mush as people want to say that they were, ther not. if any thin u all get mad cause u cant do whatever u want and get away with it . and how cares any way its just a picture
Reply
Phil says:
April 29, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Annie Liebovitz’ underlying political motive was to sexualize a Christian child and destroy Miley’s value as a cultural icon for gentiles. Liebovitz was the longtime lesbian lover of the late Susan (Rosenblatt) Sontag. Sontaq once described white gentiles as “the cancer of human history,” then apologized for insensitivity toward cancer victims. Liebovitz is all about promoting anti-gentile hatred and pedophilia, the latter as a backdoor approach toward normalizing homosexual pedophilia within the larger society. Money is very much secondary to her ethnic and political goals. The photography session with Miley and Billy Ray was manna from heaven for this woman. Unfortunately, politically immature Christian parents are easily duped or go along with the manipulation for monetary reasons. They are duped because an awareness of the ethnic motivation and cause behind so much of what is wrong with society is treated as a sin by the mainline Judeo-Christian heresy. I sincerely hope that Billy Ray wakes up and finds a way to get a handle on all this. Next up: After Miley’s reduction to a capricious Lolita comes industry pressure to promote interracial sex. It is all, so very predictable.
Reply