You've got people like Angelina going to Africa and dedicating time and money to causes.
Hey, you probably pay more attention than I do--what's your take on the story that they closed down Namibia so Angelina could have Shiloh in peace?
Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
Mal ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
Natter 52: Playing with a full deck?
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
§ ita § - Jul 17, 2007 8:53:04 am PDT #8484 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Glamcookie - Jul 17, 2007 8:57:21 am PDT #8485 of 10001
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister
Hm, I never heard that. It probably happened. I don't think Angelina is a saint or anything, it's just that the Aniston thing seems like such a ploy to be taken seriously or something. Plus she has just always irritated me.
§ ita § - Jul 17, 2007 8:59:14 am PDT #8486 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
she has just always irritated me.
Heh. I hear you.
My sister was grilling me for my Brangelina in Namibia opinion, and I failed to have enough of one. She's pissed at the Pitts, I'm reeling at the idea that the government of any country would roll over like that for movie actors.
Glamcookie - Jul 17, 2007 9:02:47 am PDT #8487 of 10001
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister
If that's how it went down, I think the govt. probably did it because the Pitt clan being there brings such publicity to the region. Good for Namibia. From what I remember seeing, it wasn't them requesting it - it was the govt. putting the word out. "Hey, we're celebrity friendly! Come have your babies here in peace!"
§ ita § - Jul 17, 2007 9:06:07 am PDT #8488 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
it was the govt. putting the word out. "Hey, we're celebrity friendly! Come have your babies here in peace!"
That's what bothers me, honestly. I just can't see that particularly playing out in the interests of the average Namibian.
Glamcookie - Jul 17, 2007 9:09:38 am PDT #8489 of 10001
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister
Yeah, I'm not so sure it's good for Namibia, just that I could see the govt. thinking it is. Also, if I'm remembering correctly, it was the invasion of the paparazzi from other places (not Namibia) that the govt. was reacting to. Meaning, not so good for Namibia to have all these fools running wild. However, they were spending money there on food, lodging, etc. I feel like I'm arguing with myself. I hate when that happens.
§ ita § - Jul 17, 2007 9:11:00 am PDT #8490 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I feel like I'm arguing with myself. I hate when that happens.
At least you get to win.
Unfortunately you also get to lose.
My sister's super-sensitive about the rolling over and begging for the US because we generate so much of our foreign exchange from tourism, and it can be hard to walk the line.
Nutty - Jul 17, 2007 9:11:26 am PDT #8491 of 10001
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
they closed down Namibia
The whole country?? ...Actually, I had a friend who did her Peace Corps in Namibia, and she kept having to be evacuated due to UNITA rebels being rebellious on the border, so I presume it's actually kind of impossible to shut down the whole country for any reason at all.
Windhoek, maybe -- reschedule all the flights for that day, detour the traffic away from [wherever]. But yeah, I'm not sure I understand why. Trying for tourist dollars, you kind of want to appeal to a big market, you know? Celebrities, while individually lucrative, just aren't a large number of people.
§ ita § - Jul 17, 2007 9:15:54 am PDT #8492 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Trying for tourist dollars, you kind of want to appeal to a big market, you know? Celebrities, while individually lucrative, just aren't a large number of people.
I totally understand using two of the most watched celebs to promote your sensitivity--tourist destinations are going to be more desirable the more stars there are there--either by people who want to brush shoulders with celebs, or by people who want to keep up with the Jolie-Pitts.
That part totally makes sense to me.
What I don't like is the degree to which a gesture like that can make the country beholden to the celeb, and it's not a good long term investment.
tommyrot - Jul 17, 2007 9:27:32 am PDT #8493 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
A kiddie birthday party aboard a boat took a macabre turn yesterday when its pint-sized passengers spotted a corpse floating in the Hudson off Manhattan's Pier 40.
The shocked parents of birthday girl Chloe Carvajal, 3, told The Post that they had shelled out $1,500 for the round-trip jaunt around the Statue of Liberty for about 40 guests, including at least 15 youngsters.
They were horrified when the rug rats got a premature lesson in crime-scene investigation at around 1 p.m.
"There were children there who saw the body, and they were crying," said the girl's mother, Jill Carvajal, 37. "The boat was circling the body."
Chloe's dad, Carlos Carvajal, 36, a commercial litigation lawyer, added, "At least 15 kids saw this. The kids were screaming, crying, 'Mommy! What's going on? What is that?'