<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jennifer Aniston left bruised after sex</title>
	<link>http://hollywood.dcealumni.com/2005/07/327/jennifer-aniston-left-bruised-after-sex/</link>
	<description>Movie Review, Views and News</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:47:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Pedro Dixon</title>
		<link>http://hollywood.dcealumni.com/2005/07/327/jennifer-aniston-left-bruised-after-sex/#comment-7</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2005 05:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://hollywood.dcealumni.com/2005/07/327/jennifer-aniston-left-bruised-after-sex/#comment-7</guid>
					<description>{AP)Associated Press
Updated: 5:39 p.m. ET Dec. 6, 2005
LOS ANGELES - Jennifer Aniston is suing a paparazzo, claiming he invaded her privacy by using a telephoto lens to photograph her topless at her house.

My previous comments said it best. Like church we go for peace of mind. Our homes is our private domain. What if a Actors child or Teenager is moving about indecently about the property of a private home do a   camera pervert have a right to be snapping pictures? How many perverted pictures do some sick bastards have in their possession. Sticking cameras with telephoto lens snapping pictures through someone bedroom window or beach house while they are disrobing is sick. This is just to sell porn on the open market mainly overseas.  A paparazzi and the agency they represent should be sued and lawfully charged. A candid celebrity photo is worth more to the public (on public domain), than the sickening gut feeling most people get when they find out the picture was snap by a paparazzi or a sick sucker through the window of a private home.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>{AP)Associated Press<br />
Updated: 5:39 p.m. ET Dec. 6, 2005<br />
LOS ANGELES - Jennifer Aniston is suing a paparazzo, claiming he invaded her privacy by using a telephoto lens to photograph her topless at her house.</p>
<p>My previous comments said it best. Like church we go for peace of mind. Our homes is our private domain. What if a Actors child or Teenager is moving about indecently about the property of a private home do a   camera pervert have a right to be snapping pictures? How many perverted pictures do some sick bastards have in their possession. Sticking cameras with telephoto lens snapping pictures through someone bedroom window or beach house while they are disrobing is sick. This is just to sell porn on the open market mainly overseas.  A paparazzi and the agency they represent should be sued and lawfully charged. A candid celebrity photo is worth more to the public (on public domain), than the sickening gut feeling most people get when they find out the picture was snap by a paparazzi or a sick sucker through the window of a private home.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
