Kelly Brook is a gifted saleswoman

October 17th, 2007 // 109 Comments
1017_kelly_brook_perfume_00.jpg

British model/actress Kelly Brook debuted her new perfume at Superdrug in London yesterday. She possesses two wonderful qualities for being a product salesman: a great smile and a winning personality. Yep, those are the two most notable things about her. I bet if you met her in person those would be the first two things you noticed. Well that, and her intelligence.

Photos: Splash News
superficial

  1. kitty_kat

    @ 31- Iunno…
    Before…
    http://www.celebroundup.com/salma-hayeks-boob-job/
    How the hell did this happen?

  2. Johnny

    FRIST you’re ugly frustrated little bitch

    Ok now switching back my eyes at my sexy sweetheard in the red dress

  3. IKE

    Remember when “attractive” used to be the flat-chested no ass image.
    Whew!! I AM GLAD THOSE DAYS ARE GONE!!!!

    22, Thanks for the Link!

  4. yowillie

    Giddy Up! Great rack.

  5. InstantAsshat-AddFame

    Why is it that every minor celebrity who comes along has to market their own stinky chemicals? All these people get perfumes and then they get a clothing line of mundane crap they didn’t even design themselves. No wonder everything looks and smells like shit anymore.

  6. kitty_kat

    And if I’m not mistaken, these pics were taken before she was pregnant.
    (Sorry for the multiple posts).

  7. Blinky (not Binky)

    NIST Admits Total Collapse Of Twin Towers Unexplainable
    Implicitly acknowledges controlled demolition only means by which towers could have fallen at free fall speed

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet
    Tuesday, October 16, 2007

    The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

    In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim’s family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, “We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”

    A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the “collapse initiation” proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics.

    In addition, NIST’s own studies confirmed that virtually none of the steel in either tower reached temperatures hotter than 500 degrees. The point at which steel weakens is 1000 degrees and melting point is reached at 1,500 degrees, according to NIST itself.

    “NIST’S 10,000-page report purports to explain what it calls “collapse initiation” — the loss of several floors’ vertical support,” writes Kevin Barrett of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. “In order to dream up this preposterous scenario, NIST had to ignore its own tests that showed that virtually none of the steel got hotter than 500 degrees f. It had to claim that somehow the planes took out many core columns, despite the fact that only a direct hit by an engine would have been likely to do so, and that the chances of this happening even once are fairly low. It had to preposterously allege that the plane that nicked the corner of the South Tower took out more core columns than the one that hit the North Tower almost dead center. It had to tweak all the parameters till they screamed bloody murder and say that the steel was far weaker than it actually was, the fire was far hotter than it actually was, the sagging was far greater than it actually was, and so on. And so NIST hallucinated a computer-generated fantasy scenario for “collapse initiation”–the failure of a few floors.”

    “But how do you get from the failure of a few floors to total collapse at free-fall speed of the entire structure? The short answer: You don’t. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the laws of physics understands that even if all of the vertical supports on a few floors somehow failed catastrophically at exactly the same moment–a virtually impossible event, but one necessary to explain why the Towers would come straight down rather than toppling sideways–the top part of the building could not fall THROUGH the still-intact, highly robust lower part of the building, straight through the path of most resistance, just as fast as it would have fallen through thin air.”

    “Thus total free-fall collapse, even given NIST’s ridiculous “initiation” scenario, is utterly impossible. The probability of it happening is exactly equal to the probability of the whole building suddenly falling upward and landing on the moon,” concludes Barrett.

    NIST have yet to properly address the sudden freefall collapse of WTC Building 7, which imploded on the late afternoon of 9/11 despite not being hit by a jetliner.

    In August 2006, NIST promised to scientifically evaluate whether explosive devices could have contributed to the 47-story building’s collapse but no answers have been forthcoming.

    In August of this year, James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, called for an independent inquiry into NIST’s investigation of the collapse of the twin towers.

    Quintiere said NIST’s conclusions were “questionable”, that they failed to follow standard scientific procedures and that their failure to address Building 7 belied the fact that the investigation was incomplete.

  8. hausfrau

    #57 means: NICE TITS!!!

  9. wtf binky

    too many words TOO MANY

    My poor insignificant brain! It’s about to explode!

    Seriously, too many words, I didn’t read it.

  10. Auntie Kryst

    @57 OK only bothered to read the first and last two paragraphs, but I will grant you, deftly handed CNTRL C and CNTRL V you twat. Stick to the funny.

  11. I may be frustrated, but I’m not ugly!!! Asswipe.

    Anywho… WTC binky!!! ENOUGH!!!

    Here…I have a martini with Binky’s name on it. I don’t have a bong hit, but I know people who might…

  12. I do have a xanax though

  13. My sources (can’t tell you who they are) CIA (you didn’t here that from me) say that Paris Hilton is a distraction for WW3

  14. In other news, someone keeps stealing my mail. I think they want to take over my identity. I don’t know why someone would want a credit rating of 3 but whatever…

  15. scooby

    god in heaven what a great set of tits. and finally a british honey with decent teeth!

  16. tonycatman

    #34 and anyone else who doesn’t know who she is.

    She was no.1 in the UK FHM 100.

    They have properly beautiful women in the UK. No fake tan, no peroxide hair, no fake tits. Just naturally gorgeous.

    She is actually really nice, too.

  17. Maiko Weymiller

    My husband wants me to get breast augmentation. After looking at her I can see why. Nice.

  18. Axeldee

    she is the friken tit’s queen

    http://www.spymac.com/details/?2279410

  19. Big Dumb Oaf

    69

  20. FACE

    This is the kind of white chick I dream of banging until she is wiped out. I would tit bang her into oblivion. I would blow so many loads on her chin that she would look like a rabid dog.

  21. BlinkyIsAFuckingRetard

    #57 – you are fucking retarded. Wrap your head in tin foil and go wait for the aliens to arrive.

  22. Blinky

    @71 You believe in aliens? Now that’s some crazy shit! You need help!

  23. Sam Hain

    #72 nice try but you aren’t fooling anyone with your “aliens don’t exist” smokescreen. now step away from the cow.

  24. You can see this gal real easy here

    http://www.kellybrook.org.uk/

    2 sec google turned it up — enjoy.

  25. she is talented but I am too busy looking at her chest!

  26. MrSemprini

    I just noticed! She has a HEAD! Wow, wankers! Lookit that!!

  27. Valerie hates talentless hacks

    Big titties (yawn). Big whoop!

  28. Blinky

    I admit, I do love a good probing, but I have to narrow that down to humans. Not too keen on the inter species erotica.

  29. Narcissist

    Pic 2, the headline pic is awkward. The others are nice, though.

  30. I fuck fat women

    Billy Zane is a lucky bitch to be fucking her

  31. ph7

    Her rack belongs in the Titty Museum hall of fame.

  32. sue

    NATURAL TITS RULE!

  33. That is a pretty dress and she certainly fills out nicely. I would love to see her in a lingerie shoot.

  34. G.C.

    AAaaaah Billy Zane, mmmmmmmmmm.

  35. gerard Vandenberg

    JESUS CHRIST, DO YOU REALLY THINK IT’S WEIRD?
    Give those FLASHY TITS a good look please. People, mainly men though, will buy everything from that girl!! Just to give those wonderful TITS another close look!!

  36. britain aint so hot

    uhm, #66… i thought britain’s fav was that tranny meth ho jordan… she is disgusting and completely unatural looking. her tits are too big and she has to wear granny bras, and she has no ass ( jordan NOT this girl). this girl is good though

  37. not my cup of tea

    i like big, but im not gonna lie… i might like her alil better if they were alil smaller. they kinda drop like an older woman who has breast fed a lot. i like them really perky looking. shes pretty tho.

  38. steve

    are those real? Cuz fakers are just plain tacky and SO 1990.

    Fake tits are like segregation: Separate and not equal.

    I.e., that nasty flat stretch of skin between two hard round soccer balls (e.g., Victoria Beckham) is SOOOOOO nasty

  39. theShizaan

    OMG!

    Those are some pretty…

    …straight teeth for an english woman.

  40. yes, she has big intelligence..

  41. @87 These look like the tits of an older woman who has breast fed a lot? Seriously, how old are you?

  42. Nice blog, very informative contents. I also got similar to this one, would you mind if I ask you for a link exchange? Regards…

  43. Her face in the top pic is so odd – not exactly selling it, imo. Nice body, though – damn her.

  44. not my cup of tea

    91- im 23. why do you ask?

  45. why is it that

    shes looks good, but here is a question.
    why do girls with big boobs naturally a D or higher always seems to have big guts, no waist, and concave square asses.
    im not talking about celebs… cause those type of bodies aren’t attractive enough to make it to being a celebrity.
    im talking about everyday women with really big boobs.
    i really feel this is true.
    i’ve seen women with C cups that have small waists and butts… but usually women with naturally big boobs like D and plus have ugly shaped bodies. and they usually have skinny arms and legs.

  46. why is it that

    thats why is someone made me pic which is better boobs or butt, i might pick butt, cause if you have a GREAT butt ( not too fat or flat) usually you will have a small waiste and shapely legs and overall good body.

  47. Sam Hain

    personally, although not at all opposed to nice breasts, I am about the legs and ass, because they are the frame for what it is that a person is really there for.

    but none-the-less — YAY TITS!

  48. Yeah Kelly is well pretty, she is VERY big in UK and taking part in Strictly Come Dancing, which is the original show for your US version Dancing with the Stars.

    Check out my blog for info about it if you like:)

  49. PunkA

    She is a Brit chick. Great from the waist up, not too impressive from the waist down. It is like the Brits think having shapely legs and a nice butt are against the law. They must really love pears in the UK.

  50. tits aren't number 1 2 me

    maybe i wanna see her in a bikini, and maybe i don’t. legs stomach and butt are most important for bikinis. and i don’t know what is goin on below the big mammis.

Leave A Comment