Although they were born in the summer, Ricky Martin has decided to show off his baby twins Valentino and Matteo for the first time in People, while describing exactly how spiritual he feels when they smile or cry or poo or whatever.

Ricky Martin is raising the twins alone as a single father, so they obviously won’t be breastfed. Not because Ricky is a man and therefore can’t lactate, but because his nipples are probably already manky and chewed up and stuff.

Previously, if Ricky Martin ever invited you to take a look at his twins, you’d be well advised to run like hell before he either got his nipples or testicles out and introduced you to them by name. We don’t know if he does that or not, by the way, but he does give off that kind of vibe, doesn’t he?

But if Ricky Martin asks if you want to see his twins now, you’re probably a bit safer because he has actually become the father of twins – two boys born in the summer named Valentino and Matteo. True, the babies might just be an elaborate front for the testicle-baring set-up of his that we’ve obviously just invented, but let’s not go too far down that road, eh?

Anyway, it’s been a few months since Ricky Martin fathered his twins, and Ricky, children and Surrogate Female Birthing Pod 765-N are doing well enough for Ricky to show the kinds off in the new edition of People magazine, as AP reports:

Says Martin: “I’m so happy! Everything they do, from smiling to crying, feels like a blessing. Being a father feels amazing. This has been the most spiritual moment in my life.” And Martin says: “I’m the one who changes the diapers, the one that feeds them, the one that bathes them, the one that puts them to sleep.”

Ah yes, we believe it’s in the Bible that the essence of spirituality is defined as ‘waking up in the morning with a bad stomach and having to open a shit-filled nappy that smells like a backed-up sewer line on the Equator and then wiping up the overnight poo-smear off the buttocks of a tiny screaming ungrateful animal that’s simultaneously squirting a hot jet of piss into your eye’. Matthew 3:16, if we remember correctly.

But good for Ricky Martin for not playing by the celebrity baby rulebook. He deserves the money that People magazine is paying him for the baby pictures. That money, incidentally is, wait, let’s work this out… Angelina Jolie sold pictures of her twins for $14 million… divide that by the amount of time since people last thought of Ricky Martin as a celebrity… minus a mother… carry the three…

Oh, our calculations say that Ricky Martin is actually paying People to publish the pictures. Our mistake. Congratulations anyway, we guess.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Don’t know who Adrienne Bailon is? Don’t worry – neither do we! Just know that there are naked Adrienne Bailon photos all over the internet, and there’s supposedly a sex tape on the way too. Best of all, Adrienne Bailon is 25 years old, so you can look at her naked photos without being terrified that the police will find the images on your hard drive and get all Gary Glitter on you.

We’re sure this is hugely embarrassing time for Adrienne Bailon, and the poor girl’s probably worried that these naked photos will spell the end of her career – but there’s no reason for that to happen. Just look at Kim Kardashian – a similar thing happened to her and she managed to last three full weeks on Dancing With The Stars. That’s the big time, Adrienne!

We know this makes us sound old, but naked internet photos of female celebrities just aren’t what they were. Time was you’d be tripping over all sorts of nude photos of everyone from Vanessa Hudgens out of High School Musical to the dull one from Sex And The City to the ginger mannish one from Desperate Housewives.

But now? Now people are so uptight that they throw a tantrum if they see some of Miley Cyrus’ back. That’s hardly the reaction of a rational society, and so we all need to thank Adrienne Bailon with all our hearts for what she’s just done.

You see, naked photos of Adrienne Bailon have appeared on the internet, and they’ve created a sort of perfect naked storm. Here’s why.

Adriene Bailon is one of the stars of Disney’s Cheetah Girls – which means there’s corrupted youth, the tainted reputation of an organisation that prides itself on family appeal and something for the dads. Adrienne Bailon is 25 – which means there isn’t the moral iffyness that you get from gawping at a naked teenager. Adrienne Bailon is also dating Kim Kardashian’s brother – which means there’s an ingrained tradition of getting naked on the internet at work. And, best of all, there’s supposedly an Adrienne Bailon sex tape on the loose as well – which means that she’s definitely a bit dirty and can’t get away with the ‘this was a one-time mistake’ excuse. See? Perfect.

Now, the usual formula of reacting to this sort of thing involves a couple of weeks spent complaining about intrusion of privacy until the girl realises that she can make millions of dollars by agreeing to distribute the sex tape. But that’s not the case with the naked pictures of Adrienne Bailon, because Adrienne is furious enough to sue anyone who distributes her naked photos. Her lawyer has released the following statement:

“The photos that have surfaced of Adrienne Bailon were stolen from her laptop over a week ago at an airport in NY and sent to several media outlets. These photos were taken in private. Adrienne will be pursuing legal action against the person or person’s sending these private photos out. Adrienne is deeply sorry for any pain this may have caused to her fans.“

Honestly, was that really necessary? By all means Adrienne Bailon should sue anyone who tries to distribute these naked photos of her – even though they’ve made her a billion times more famous than she was a couple of weeks go – but come on.

Lawyers are expensive, and it’s silly to waste your money paying them to apologise to your fans. You’re a Cheetah Girl, for crying out loud. How many fans have you got? And don’t count all the randy old pervert fans you’ve picked up in the last couple of days. That’d be cheating.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

And since Kate Winslet has an interview in the new issue of Vanity Fair, it stands to reason that she should get as absolutely naked as flipping possible in every single accompanying picture. But here’s the crazy thing – Kate Winslet’s naked body actually looks fairly decent in the photos.

And this is chubby old Kate Winslet we’re talking about here – lumpy bumpy old chubby old Kate Winslet. So if her naked pictures looked good, it’s only logical to assume that it was because they’d been mangled beyond all recognition with an airbrush. Just don’t mention that around Kate Winslet, because there’s a strong chance she’ll punch your face off if she hears you.

We’ve always had a soft spot for Kate Winslet – she’s living proof that if a fat child loses enough weight by the time she grows up, then the resulting combination revenge and lack of self-esteem means that she’ll almost definitely take off all of her clothes whenever she gets the chance.

And, make no mistake, Kate Winslet was a fat child. That’s not a secret – Kate Winslet mentioned it herself during the endless insecure whine that passed for her interview with Vanity Fair this month. However, while the text might have painted a picture of a woman so wracked with neuroses that she appeared to be impersonating Woody Allen on a particularly brutal episode of 10 Years Younger, the accompanying photos told a very different story indeed.

The accompanying photos, in fact, told a story of a sexy, unusually confident woman sprawled naked across a fur rug with her bum sticking out. The only logical explanation for that, given the chasm between the grubby little lardpot described in the interview and the beautiful woman in the photographs, was that Kate Winslet’s naked body had been airbrushed and Photoshopped and tinkered with until it bore no resemblance to real life at all.

That was the rumour, anyway. But people should know that if you go around spreading rumours about Kate Winslet’s body then you’ll end up with either a lawsuit or a really ruddy strongly-worded letter from one of her employees. Which is what happened yesterday, as People reports:

“Kate is furious at suggestions that her body has been airbrushed,” her rep tells PEOPLE exclusively. “She is in terrific shape and what you see is how she looks or she would never have agreed to pose for those shots.”

You hear that, haters? Kate Winslet’s naked body wasn’t digitally retouched at all, so you can go and shove it. Except that, in truth, the photos were retouched a bit for the magazine, with manipulations made to colouring and skin tone. But that doesn’t mean that Kate Winslet isn’t furious, because she is. She’s furious.

In fact, Kate Winslet is so furious at all those people who claimed that her digitally-retouched Vanity Fair photos had been digitally-retouched that she’s vowed to forgo any digital airbrushing whatsoever next time she poses naked for a glossy magazine. What you see will be all natural Winslet, from the lumps on her body to the throbbing vein that’s splattered across the side of her head because she keeps getting worked up about stuff that nobody else gives a shit about.

Still, despite all this talk of airbrushing, we shouldn’t lose focus of the big picture here – that Kate Winslet has successfully made the leap from being naked in films to being naked in magazines. Congratulations Kate – now you’re only inches away from fulfilling your dream of starting your own premium subsciption-based website to be naked in.

Such massive overexposure to a pretty much genderless, pre-pubescent body made everybody outside of the Glitter household puke at the same time. This vomit eventually trickled into the Atlantic, and then floated north until its acidic content had melted all the ice caps, robbing millions of polar bears of their natural hunting grounds, and covering their edible penguins in a filthy, orange coat of watery slime.

Why PETA hasn’t raised more of a stink about this we’ll never know.

Anyway – the guy that did the hacking, well he’d brag online about how the police would never find him because he moved too often. But now he’s been raided by the FBI. We thought this might happen ever since we heard Cyrus would be playing the part of J Edgar Hoover in a sort of West Wing prequel.

What we’re saying is she’s probably well connected.

Miley Cyrus‘ G rating was officially ripped from her the moment some 19-year-old guy guessed her email password and used it to obtain pictures of her apparently three-year-old body posed this way and that. He tried selling these pictures, but celebrity news outlets on the up and up weren’t interested in paying for pictures obtained so illegally. That’s why the guy eventually posted them for free.

The moment this happened a cell in Guantanamo got swept out, its weird brown cake-like substance got chiseled off the toilet, and its bed got draped in surprisingly comfortable new linens. That’s because although he didn’t know it – the Miley-hacker made himself the subject of thousands of FBI round table discussions.

Wired has the down low:

“A 19-year-old hacker who published provocative photos of teen queen Miley Cyrus earlier this year was raided by the FBI Monday morning in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. The hacker, Josh Holly, repeatedly bragged online about breaking into the Disney star’s e-mail account and stealing her photos. He also gave interviews to bloggers and others and boasted that authorities would never find him because he moved so often…

“When agents finally left his apartment after conducting an extensive search, they had three computers and Holly’s phone, among other things.”

While under a heavy interrogation, Holly also confessed to purple-nurpling Raven Symone, dwarf tossing Zack & Cody, and smearing baby wasp eggs all over the insides of Mickey Mouse’s recently pressed underpants.

Authorities are allegedly seeking out animal cruelty charges over that last incident.

Good. Micky is a cherished icon, and his safety is paramount.

That should be applauded – it’s easy to forget that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are real people. As such they need to protect their privacy with as much vigour as they possibly muster. There are some things that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have to keep for themselves, and we should respect that.

Unless, you know, Angelina Jolie’s got a new film coming out, in which case it’s perfectly OK for Brad Pitt to take a picture of her with a baby’s mouth clamped around the end of her boob and then sell it to W magazine for cash as a covershot. That’s right kids – those Angelina Jolie breastfeeding photos you’ve been anticipating with equal horror and arousal are finally here.

For a couple so entrenched in their own desperate need for privacy that they’ll either call the secret service or get you beaten up if you stray too close to either of them, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have made some real schoolboy errors when it comes to protecting themselves lately.

Firstly, it was revealed that Angelina Jolie’s arm has been tattooed with the birth coordinates of all her children – letting all the world’s stalkers know that a game of Baby Treasure Hunt is just one grisly non-consensual amputation away – and now Angelina Jolie has decided to pose for the most unprivate photos possible without someone hiring an endoscope first. That’s right – it’s Angelina Jolie breastfeeding.

On the cover of this month’s W magazine, Angelina Jolie can be seen with her top pulled down and a tiny hand partly obscuring her breast. We’re assuming she’s breastfeeding one of her new twins, anyway – there’s an equal chance that the photos are a document of Angelina Jolie trying to revive Jeremy Beadle’s dead body by shoving her tit in his face.

Actually, the Angelina Jolie breastfeeding photos are kind of tasteful – which is a profound disappointment to anyone hoping they’d involve Angelina spinning round on a plinth squirting warm jets of milk out of her nipples into the open mouths of all her children sitting in a circle beneath her – and breastfeeding activists have welcomed the photos with the open arms and milky stains leaking through their T-shirt that you’d expect from them, as AP reports:

“Breast-feeding in public reveals a whole lot less than what has been revealed on the red carpet. … I think we do need more role models like Angelina Jolie willing to be photographed and say, `Hey look, it can be done, it oughta be done,’” said La Leche spokeswoman Jane Crouse.

Of course, it’s wonderful that Angelina Jolie is breastfeeding her new twins. Breastfed children have less risk of developing childhood leukaemia, insulin-dependent diabetes and respiratory infections, plus breastfeeding has shown to improve a child’s neurological development. That is unless your mum decides to take a photo of you gobbing all over one of her tits for the cover of a magazine, because long-term that’s probably an expressroute to you being sort of neurologically effed.

Also, we’re not exactly sure how these Angelina Jolie breastfeeding pictures will affect the ongoing biological/adopted Jolie-Pitt civil war? Will the adopted children be jealous of Vivienne and Knox because they never got to suckle on Angelina Jolie’s teat? Will the twins be jealous of the adopted children because they won’t have widely-published breastfeeding photos come back to haunt them at school, ultimately leading to them gaining the unshakable nicknames Tittysuck and Boobychew? It’s hard to tell.

Still, Angelina Jolie’s breastfeeding shots have taught us all an important lesson here – that Angelina Jolie’s got a film coming out soon, and that she really wants you to go and see it.

But that particular memo doesn’t appear to have reached Minnie Driver, because she’s just done the unthinkable – she’s posted a photo of her new son Henry on MySpace. For free. What a massive idiot.

Doesn’t Minnie Driver know what she’s missing? With all the public interest in her, Minnie Driver could have secured herself a huge cheque for the exclusive rights to those photos instead of spunking them away for free on the internet. She could have bought herself something really nice with that photoshoot money, like a plastic watch or a pair of flipflops or a couple of loaves of bread or something. Tsk.

Minnie Driver is a rubbish celebrity, and that’s solid fact. She hasn’t been in any decent films since… well, she hasn’t been in any decent films. Her attempts at songwriting all sound like soggy Dido queef. And she’s handled the birth of her baby like – oh God, we think we’re going to throw up – like a civilian.

To be fair, Minnie Driver had a bash at the celebrity baby thing to begin with – when her giant baby was born last month she decided to name it Story. Which sounds good, until you realise that she also called it Henry. That just displays a lack of focus – Henry Story hardly counts as a celebrity name because only half of its name isn’t a real name. Bogantwaii Story we could have dealt with. Grapefruit Story we could have dealt with. Mmmbop Story we could have dealt with. But Henry Story? Ugh. Get out.

And, just to make sure she’s really rubbing our noses in it, Minnie Driver has decided to shun the traditional celebrity pursuit of selling baby pictures to a magazine for millions of dollars in favour of just bunging a snap on MySpace instead. It’s a bloody disgrace. The New York Daily News reports:

Big photo shoot? Psh! Minnie Driver doesn’t roll that way. The notoriously un-Hollywood actress has posted a photo of her infant son Henry Story Driver on MySpace. Driver’s rep told the Daily News on Monday that her client wasn’t trying to make a statement with Henry’s public debut – she simply wanted to share the photo with friends and fans.

That’s right Minnie Driver, you try to be all clever and anti-establishment. See if we care. Look, if we can’t pay a couple of quid for a rubbish magazine just to gawp at a photo of you holding a baby that’s completely identical to every other baby ever born, then we don’t want to look at the poxy thing at all.

And, oh, MySpace. How very modern of you, Minnie Driver! Why didn’t you go the whole hog and post a video of your baby happyslapping a pensioner on YouTube? Huh? Because… OK, actually we would quite like to see that.

Anyway, good for Minnie Driver. She’s proved once again that she doesn’t buy into the trappings of celebrity life easily, and we can’t help but respect her a little bit for that. Although we can’t help feeling that there’s another, much more obvious, reason for her sticking her baby photos on MySpace – celebrity baby apathy.

It’s simple – the public is so fed up of being force-fed celebrity baby photos that they even react with boredom to pictures of the pictures of megastars like Christina Aguilera and Jennifer Lopez. And if pictures of famous babies reduce people to boredom, then imagine what they’d do if they saw Minnie Driver’s baby in a magazine. Riots, looting, the messy destruction of civilisation as we know it. No, Minnie Driver deserves a medal for her good citizenship.

Because, apparently, somebody actually thinks that. There’s currently a huge investigation going on in America after a photo of Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding with a boob exposed was apparently copied several times with the intention to post them onto the internet or sell them for profit. And since Jamie Lynn Spears is under the age of 18, the thief could technically be hauled up on a pornography charge.

We think we should probably point out at this juncture that the allegedly stolen photo is of Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding her baby, and not of Jamie Lynn Spears being breastfed by her own mother. We know that Jamie Lynn Spears is only young, but that’s no excuse for weirdness.

You know what gives us the horn? Pictures of sexually-irresponsible teenagers having their knockers chewed on by babies. Phwoar.

Of course, we’re joking. If we had to make a list of all the sexiest things in the world, that scenario we just described would be right near the bottom, sandwiched right between ‘your nan doing a striptease to Push It by Salt-N-Pepa‘ and ‘1950s production line videos about minced beef’. But it sounds as if there’s one stone-cold lunatic in the world that does find the idea of Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding sexy and, worse still, they think that others might as well.

You see, when she’s not writing notes that make her mother cry or failing to be empathetic towards other sexually-clumsy teenagers, Jamie Lynn Spears has a baby to raise. And, as everybody knows, part of raising a baby as its mother involves jabbing your tit in its mouth from time to time to stop it crying.

And, of course, part of raising a baby as its father involves taking photos of the mother with her tit out, even though you’re basically mugging her of her precious dignity, and then getting the photo printed at Wal-Mart fully aware that several other people will see your teenage girlfriend’s breast in the process and possibly make copies of that breast and try to illegally distribute it for fun and/or profit.

In that case, Jamie Lynn Spears’ boyfriend Casey Aldridge is doing a bang-up job, because a photo of Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding that was taken on his camera and printed at a local Wal-Mart could have been duplicated several times by an employee, sparking a federal pornography investigation. The Sun reports:

Casey took a memory card of 12 family pictures to be developed at his local Wal-Mart in Louisiana. In the offending snap, Jamie Lynn’s left breast is exposed as she feeds daughter Maddie. Because she is under 18, selling the pictures, or buying them, could constitute a violation of federal laws prohibiting pornography – even though they weren’t taken for sexual purposes.

Whoever allegedly made copies of these Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding photos must be terrified at the moment – going to jail is bad enough, but going to jail because you got aroused by the sight of 17-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears’ dribbly tit, and knowing that you’ll have to use the phrase ‘Jamie Lynn Spears’ dribbly tit’ when explaining your gap in employment during all future job interviews, is bound to put the fear of God into you.

But this story isn’t anywhere near as bad as it seems. For instance, Jamie Lynn Spears hasn’t lost the photo of her breastfeeding her baby, she just mistaken allowed it to possibly be copied by someone. And, so long as she still has the original photo, and therefore still has something to show her baby’s appalled friends in years to come, all’s not lost.

One more time, for the road, Miley Cyrus has got half naked, someone has taken photos and one more time, for the road, they have been uploaded on to the internet. And we all know how very much the world of the internet loves pictures of 15-year-olds in small amounts of clothing.

She’s fifteen, people. Stop it. If this were a no-name young girl from Bognor Regis then whomever uploaded these pictures would probably receive something of a slapped wrist by the local authorities, but because it’s a superstar Disney child-celeb it’s all fine to go plastering half the internet with scantly-clad photographs of her.

Go on – search for it. You’ll find them on supposedly respectable sites, including FOX News. This is the same FOX News that cries crocodile tears and attempts to whip up public outrage every time anything ‘immoral’ happens in the world. Apparently a small girl in her underwear doesn’t qualify for that same outrage – in fact, it’s news.

If you’ve resisted the tempation to look at these near-naked photos of a child doing the rounds then well done, you’re one of the few that will be allowed to survive the hecklerspray armageddon, which will allow us a fresh start in a world free of the absolute filth of the earth gutter scum that seem to be propagating everywhere the ex-Hannah Montana is popping up.

Not content with appearing on the front of Vanity Fair and making some people – apart from her dad, seemingly – uncomfortable with the semi-nudity on show, Miley went on to have about thirty thousand different pictures of hear nearly with her clothes all (mostly) off and stuff.

Obviously the tweeny little thing apologised for all her actions and went back to work as normal with her Disney cohorts. But she just couldn’t help herself, could she? No, like every other person in the world since the advent of Myspace, she decided she simply had to take even more pictures of herself with very few clothes on.

Kids are idiots, aren’t they? Especially ones very much in the public eye. Either that or they’ve become even cleverer than they’ve ever been and are involved in campaigns to make adults around the world feel slightly uncomfortable with the imagery they are confronted with on supposedly reputable news-based websites.

But no – we aren’t going to judge Miley Cyrus for this. She’s either been very stupid or very smart, and either way she’s grabbed herself a ton of new headlines. No, we’ll go for those of questionable morality that seem to be having so much fun plastering the internet with these images as news.

We now live in a world where it has become acceptable for $14 million to be paid for pictures of babies, and where photographs of an underage girl posing with little in the way of clothes has become front page news – with the pictures (or at least links to the pictures) posted alongside the report.

But at least we can still wait for the ultimate test, to see how low these people will really stoop. According to FOX News:

“DigitalGangster.com allegedly has even more scandalous images of Cyrus.”

Let’s see if the world will actually post what is technically child porn as news. Go on. Let’s really see how fucked society has become.

Well, you’re wrong. Because they’ve finally gone and released pictures of the A-list couple’s bundle of gametes – though fortunately there doesn’t seem to be a Bono in sight. That would be too much.

Popping up on Hello! and People over the weekend, the images show… some famous people with their newborn kids. Seriously – what did you expect? Hecklerspray hoped the photos would include explosions, a car chase et al, but those hopes were well and truly dashed on their release. Typical.

And to confound matters further it gets leaked that these pictures cost the magazines $14 million dollars. Now, granted, that’s only about £20 with today’s exchange rate – but the fact remains that a staggering amount of cashmoney was paid for some pictures. Of some young children. To show to people who have no actual connection with said children.

Rather than getting annoyed at Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, for once we’re going to turn and pour scorn on everyone else in the world. Because, apparently, we live in a world where it is a sound business practice to pay fourteen million dollars for some pictures of some kids. Christ – we can’t even be annoyed at mum and dad as they’ve gone and donated their fee to charity, rather than throw it on their Scrooge McDuck-sized pile.

After the four-decade pregnancy, the ‘has she-hasn’t she had them’ crap that circulated when the couple ran off to France followed by the frighteningly standard names dished out to the sprogs, it comes as something of a disappointment that Brad and Angelina can’t top the whole saga off with a grand gesture.

Not that donating $14 million to charity isn’t a grand gesture – we just mean a grand gesture that we’d like to see. Like giving their good pals hecklerspray a few million to cover the bills (credit crunch, you see). Or by using the money to have a giant cannon built on the top of a mountain, which could be used to shoot any country seen to be being nasty to its orphans. That’s certainly something Brad and Angelina seem to care about, plus it’s entertaining enough to make other people in the world care.

But no – it’s been, gone and ended up in some charity coffers. So all we can do is point our accusing, sardonic finger in the direction of the stinking, smelly media. The media who will pay fourteen million dollars for some light captured on a digital imaging chip after it has reflected off the noggins of two famous people and the creased-up meatwads they have just birthed. This is the kind of world we live in.

The kind of world where Bono is not only allowed to be said meatwads’ godfather, but also the kind of world where he is allowed to go on living. There are some things in this world that just make you want to break down and openly weep. In public. While naked. At rush hour.

This is probably the best example we’ve ever come across.

We’re so excited about Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince that we’re literally ticking off every second until its release on a giant blackboard, plus we’ve started to physically assault anyone we see who a) isn’t talking about Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince or b) doesn’t look like they’re thinking about it. Even if they’re old. That’s how much we care.

So imagine how delighted we were when we got sent images of Harry Potter, Draco Malfoy and that old wizard bloke (Gandalf?) taken from a brand new range of Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince stationery. How delighted were we? Boner delighted! And you will be too, provided you’re sexually aroused by the sight of a) stationery and b) schoolboys. But who isn’t these days, huh?

Look, we know. Thinking about another movie so soon after The Dark Knight feels like cheating. Ever single other movie made before or after will feel like watching a crude cartoon of a dancing horse now because The Dark Knight is so epic and Shakespearean and blah blah blah.

No other movies can compete at the moment, not even November’s Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince. But that’ll change, because Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince is just starting to amp up its marketing.

True, The Dark Knight may have benefited from one of its stars dying right after giving the performance of a lifetime, and by another of its stars going a bit mental at his clownmother, but Harry Potter’s got a trick or two up his sleeve as well.

Just last month we saw the first leaked photo from Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince – a photo that was about four-fifths wall. Take that Batman! What’s that? You want some more? Fine, then how about this – a bunch of scans from what appears to be some kind of Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince kiddy diary thing.

Brought to our attention by Spanish Harry Potter website BlogHogwarts.com, these scans are some of the most profoundly important images our eyes have ever had the privilege of processing. In years to come, future generations will look at that one blank notebook page with the little picture of Malfoy in the corner and regard it with the same wonder and awe as we do with Stonehenge or the Aztec pyramids.

And we’ll be staggered – absolutely staggered – if the picture of Harry Potter crouching slightly and looking a bit narked off that accompanies the May diary page doesn’t get used as a cure for cancer once scientists have properly learnt how to fully harness its power.

Honestly, the majesty of these images have left us terrified of what Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince merchandise they’ll show us next. A mug? A pencil case? No, please, not a pencil case – our mortal brains can only take so much… so much beauty.

They are forged in the harsh fires of the slums, where, before their big breaks, they are forced into lives of crime to support themselves and sometimes their over two dozen children. A former penchant for illegal drug sales is a popular topic they often thrown into verse.

Also, many of them often sing about a strong desire to enforce laws along side the man, and move inmates from cell block A to cell block B. In one case this appears to actually be true.

Rick Ross, an extraordinary rapper that we have never before heard of, used to be a prison guard. A photo of him in uniform has leaked – and he is denying absolutely everything.

Hecklerspray worked in a prison for almost a year and a half. We’d help the inmates bathe, we’d stand-guard over them while they slept, and occasionally we’d jump out of their underwear drawers first thing in the morning just to see their stunned faces. None of that was technically in our job description, but we love making murderers, rapists and various ethnic gang leaders smile.

Rick Ross knows the joys of working in a prison. He did it starting at around age 19, and pictures of him in uniform have just surfaced. This may have some serious implications for his music career, as much of his song content included details of a past criminal-infused life style.

According to the Smoking Gun:

“Apparently desperate to distance himself from any affiliation with law enforcement, the rapper Rick Ross has recently denounced as fake photos purporting to show him in a former career as a Florida prison guard. But Department of Corrections (DoC) records show that Ross, whose raps detail the Miami gangster lifestyle and his supposed days trafficking cocaine, did, in fact, work as a correctional officer for 18 months. Ross (real name: William Leonard Roberts) was appointed a prison guard in December 1995 at a salary of $22,913.54, according to the below personnel record, which was provided to TSG by Jo Ellyn Rackleff, a DoC spokesperson. The rapper’s social security number is identical to that of the jail guard.”

It seems like there’s a definite pattern recently of big tough rappers falling from ghetto-grace. Young Buck cried all over his telephone, and he wasn’t even holding a gun when he did so. His sissiness was completely un-canceled-out. Akon’s been proven prison-less recently too. Also, we heard he was only able to throw that one fan into the crowd with the help of wires and very small hydrolics.

Ross explains his dilemma away by saying somebody photo-shopped his teenage face onto a prison guard’s body. Look at the pic though – ain’t nothing photo-shopped about it.

We wouldn’t worry about it, Ross. Technically you can still sing about having been in prison. You can mention ‘cell bars’ in your songs, Just don’t mention what side you were standing on. For instance, maybe you can use something like this for your next album:

“As I stand here, looking through the bars, my gaze falls sweetly on the distance. Hark – a butterfly! Tis freedom’s emissary! Beckoning me heavenward!”

Well that doesn’t really rhyme or anything, but fill it with enough passion and nobody will notice. Also, maybe you could sing about the snack machine in the prison guard break room and the time you hit E-11, and the thing kept your money but didn’t drop your Fritos.

Kids love songs about Fritos. That’s gold, we tell you.

Which is why we’re so thrilled that the scene looks set to make it to the forthcoming movie adaptation of Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince, judging by the newly-released images from the film. It’s been captured perfectly – Harry Potter is there, the wall is there and – best of all – the blank look is there! Let’s hope the filmmakers do as much justice to the Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince scene where Ron Weasley scratches his cheek briefly! We’re so excited!

Oh, we’re just kidding – about the wall-standing, thing, that is, not about not being excited about Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince. Although we’re not. However, photos from the movie are starting to crop up all over the internet.

Cinematical has the wall-leaning shot and one of Zack from Saved By The Bell talking to Liam Gallagher, while BlogHogwarts has shots of Harry Potter looking in a drawer, holding a book and sitting around a table, with a shot of Liam Gallagher looking all ticked off at Zack from Saved By The Bell. It looks epic.

Seriously, never mind the kerfuffle about Harry Potter kissing a girl in the last film – Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince looks set to have all the controversial book-holding, drawer-looking, wall-leaning action you could ever wish for! Fasten your seatbelts everyone!

More Harry Potter images after the jump…

That’s just basic logic at work – your choices are essentially limited to taking a picture of Hugh Grant or Liz Hurley or approaching them and saying “Hi, I really loved you in Music And Lyrics/ Passenger 57.” And only the very worst kind of pathological liar would think to do that last one.

But wait – don’t go taking pictures of Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley without their permission, because they’ll sue you and win £58,000, which is what happened yesterday after a photo agency took their picture on holiday. The moral of this story is that Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley value their privacy, although clearly not enough to stop making films and doing modelling jobs. Even though everyone sort of wishes they would.

We feel sorry for celebrities sometimes. Holidays should be a time for them to relax and unwind, but the current celebrity-obsessed culture means that there’ll always be an interest in them wherever they are on the planet. What kind of a world do we live in when a celebrity can’t even angrily shout at a child until it cries without it ending up in a newspaper? It’s disgusting.

Not even Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley are safe from this level of media intrusion. Although one of them is determined to keep churning out ever more creepy romantic comedies to growing public indifference and the other doesn’t really do anything, it didn’t stop a photographer from secretly snapping them on holiday together in a private resort in the Maldives recently.

Photographs? On holiday? Without permission? Surely people are only allowed to do that if they then track you down an hour later with the photo digitally printed onto a flimsy plastic plate and try to make you buy it for £35 while shouting “souvenir” at you in a funny accent.

Apparently so, because Hugh Grant, Liz Hurley and her husband Arun Nayar have just managed to sue Big Pictures for £58,000 in damages after it sold the secret holiday photos of them to newspapers.

Of course the newspapers were interested in the photographs because a) Hugh Grant, his ex-girlfriend Liz Hurley and her husband Arun Nayar went on holiday together? That’s a bit fruity, and b) The papers got to rock out some truly hopeless headlines because of it. The Times reports:

[Lawyer] Laura Tyler told Mr Justice Eady that the photos were taken covertly without their knowledge while they were on holiday in a resort which they had chosen for the privacy and seclusion it offered. “It has been most upsetting for the claimants to have their privacy invaded by these defendants,” she said… News Group published three of the photos in News of the World in an article headed “Liz does the blokey-cokey”. Associated published four photos in The Mail on Sunday in an article headed “Hugh’s that gooseberry?”.

So congratulations to Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley for winning their lawsuit. After all, everyone knows that when someone takes your photograph they steal a little bit of your soul, which is why Hugh and Liz have fought so hard over these holiday snaps. True, having sat through American Dreamz and Double Whammy we’re not entirely convinced that Hugh Grant or Liz Hurley actually had souls to begin with, but let’s not rain on their special moment right now.

Read more:

Liz Hurley, Hugh Grant and Arun Nayar win damages for invasion of privacy – Times

Well, the very same Robbie has been papped at his LA home, lounging by the pool with his lady – and by the looks of it he hasn’t half piled on the pounds.

He’s never been stick thin, and fair play to him for that. But he’s always been known as the ‘chubby one’, especially since Noel Gallagher labelled him ‘a fat dancer’ all those years ago.

Read the rest of this entry >>

So don’t act all surprised now that a set of photos of 15-year-old Miley Cyrus yanking down her top to show off her bra and rolling around on a boy’s lap in just her underwear have emerged. And don’t act all alarmed either – although admittedly it’s not perfect role model behaviour, Miley Cyrus is a normal teenage girl, and this is what all normal teenage girls do.

Wait, no, actually that’s wrong – what we meant to say there was that this is what all normal teenage girls do in the minds of creepy old yellow-toothed men who hang around school gates at playtime and faintly smell of stale semen. But that’s close enough. Congratulations Miley Cyrus! You’re living the dream!

We all know how important it is to fit in with your peers. That’s why people play golf – nobody actually likes golf, they just start playing it because someone they work with plays it. It’s a self-perpetuating spiral of misery, golf.

Anyway, fitting in with your peers is even harder when you’re a tween sensation, because it means you have to debase yourself on a regular basis. As soon as, say, Vanessa Hudgens gets her tits and minge out in a photo, then Jamie Lynn Spears has to have underage sex until she’s pregnant just to keep up. It’s like the golf thing, but more appealing to paedophiles.

However, on tween star had managed to rise above the depravity – Miley Cyrus. Daughter of Achy Breaky Heart singer Billy Ray Cyrus and the star of TV shows, sold out tours, a number one movie and more opportunistic merchandise that you could scuttle an oil tanker with, the most trouble that Miley Cyrus had ever been in is when she didn’t wear a seatbelt once. But that’s all changed now.

Now Miley Cyrus’ butter-wouldn’t-melt reputation has been hit by some photos released onto the internet showing Miley Cyrus in just her underwear. That’s right, Miley Cyrus in her underwear. She’s 15. You should be ashamed of yourself. MTV has more:

On Monday (April 21), a set of shots depicting the squeaky-clean 15-year old Cyrus made the rounds online, showing the singer wearing just a bra and underwear while draped across the lap of an unnamed male, and another in which she’s pulling down her shirt to reveal a green bra. It’s actually the second batch of eyebrow-raising shots of Cyrus to hit the Net over the past six months, following on the heels of much tamer pictures of the singer and a female friend nearly kissing as they shared a piece of licorice; some others that popped up on her MySpace page in which she posed suggestively in a bikini and her underwear.

Really, what was Miley Cyrus thinking? She knows that she’s a role model to millions of young teenage girls, and once they all see that Miley Cyrus has effectively given them the go-ahead to strip down to their underwear and roll around on strange men’s laps, then where will we be? Mainland Europe, that’s where.

However, some are saying that these racy Miley Cyrus photos are an indication of Miley’s move from tween star to mainstream celebrity. Soon enough Miley will ditch Hannah Montana and move onto something a bit more suitable, although at the moment that looks like it’ll be a starring role in I Know Who Killed Me 2: It Was My Own Bare Vagina That Killed Me, And Also My Tits.

Fingers crossed, though, that this spate of tween flagitiousness will come to an end now that everyone from Vanessa Hudgens to Miley Cyrus has seen rude pictures of themselves published on the internet.

At least until that video of Dora The Explorer getting gangbanged by those animal friends of hers leaks out, anyway.

Read more:

New Miley Cyrus Photos — Showing Singer In Her Underwear — Hit The Net – MTV