Last week, Angelina visited a refugee camp on the Burmese-Thailand border. The camp was full of Burmese refugees that had been living there for years without any official status in either Burma/Myanmar or Thailand. During her official UNHCR visit, Jolie made comments about her desire (and the official desire of the United Nations High Commission on Refugees) to see the refugees granted permanent status within Thailand.
During her visit, Jolie also made a brief statement about the “boat people”, the Rohinyga refugees who are literally refugees stuck on a boat, unable by either Burma or Thailand to come to shore. Jolie said she hoped that Thailand would respect the Rohinyga’s human rights, and that the situation could be resolved. This was a very political statement, and it pissed off a Thai official enough to mouth off about Angelina and the UNHCR.
A senior Thai diplomat rebuked Hollywood star Angelina Jolie on Wednesday for speaking out on behalf of Muslim refugees from Myanmar.
Jolie — who is deeply involved in the plight of refugees in her capacity as a United Nations goodwill ambassador — called on the Thai government to respect the human rights of Myanmar’s Rohinyga “boat people” last week while touring a camp in northern Thailand for other refugees from the military-ruled nation.
The Rohingya, who are denied citizenship in their native land, have been trying to land in Thailand after treacherous sea journeys in recent months only to be towed back to sea and cast adrift by the Thai Navy.
Virasakdi Futrakul, permanent secretary of Thailand’s foreign ministry, said Jolie’s mission last week was to inspect a camp that houses refugees mostly from Myanmar’s ethnic Karenni minority not deal with the Rohinyga.
“We probably have to warn UNHCR that they should not have comment on this because it was not the purpose of her visit,” he said.
UNHCR spokeswoman Kitt McKinsey declined to comment on Virasakdi’s remark.
“She was extremely touched by the plight of the Rohingya people. She expressed the hope that the human rights of the Rohingya people will be respected just as the human rights of everyone in the world should be respected,” McKinsey said last week.
From The Associated Press Hosted by Google
According to The Nation, Virasakdi Futrakul, permanent secretary of Thailand’s foreign ministry, “told US actress Angelina Jolie to mind her own business and demanded an explanation from the UN agency for refugees why it brought her to a refugee camp here in the first place…[he said] the UN refugee agency has stepped out of line by taking the Hollywood star there and he also reminded the UN High Commissioner for Refugees that the UN has no mandate in these camps and therefore should not be saying anything.”
Jolie had received permission from Thailand’s Interior Ministry to visit the refugee camp, and she was working under the express direction of the UNHCR. The UNHCR gave only that brief statement: “[Jolie] was extremely touched by the plight of the Rohingya people. She expressed the hope that the human rights of the Rohingya people will be respected just as the human rights of everyone in the world should be respected.” So, it sounds like the UNHCR is backing Angie up – and they’re not alone. The Nation is running an editorial from it’s Thailand Bureau basically saying “Don’t shoot the messenger for your screw-ups, Thailand.”
The Foreign Ministry’s permanent secretary Virasak Futrakul yesterday told US actress Angelina Jolie to mind her own business and demanded an explanation from the UN agency for refugees why it brought her to a refugee camp here in the first place. The Interior Ministry supervises refugee camps along the Thai-Burmese border and the UN refugee agency has stepped out of line by taking the Hollywood star there, Virasak said. He also reminded the UN High Commissioner for Refugees that the UN has no mandate in these camps and therefore should not be saying anything. The agency said that Jolie and her partner Brad Pitt visited the camp on the Thai-Burmese border after receiving permission from the Interior Ministry.
So much for the diplomatic jargon and necessities, but excuse us for reminding the world that the international community has a major problem on its hand. It concerns the Rohingyas, a stateless people who reside in Burma’s Rakhine State bordering Bangladesh.
But while no one can fully control the words and actions of Hollywood celebrities, the fact of the matter is, when they speak, just about everybody listens.
Thailand’s claim of sovereignty over this matter is understandable given the fact that the country is not a signatory to any refugee convention. But hiding behind diplomatic protocol doesn’t hold water, especially when the country is in a public relations mess following reports that our security forces have pushed hundreds of Rohingya boat people back out to sea. Some have been left unaccounted for while others have given heartbreaking accounts of mistreatment by the Thai military, which towed them back out to sea in ill-equipped boats with little food and water. Another blow to Thailand’s image is the fact that the Indian navy, which has rescued Rohingyas, repeated their stories to the world.
We don’t need to dance to Jolie’s tune just because she is a Hollywood superstar. What we need to do is come up with a sound policy that is based on legal and humanitarian principles. Instead of blaming Jolie, who has the luxury of walking away from this after a few days of photo ops, why don’t we start talking about the root cause of the problem? Or is that against the unwritten rules of Asia when it comes to “domestic matters” in a neighbouring member country?
This particular problem is caused by the Burmese junta – a source of headaches and heartache for Thailand, all Asian members and the international community.
From The Nation (Thailand Bureau)
I can’t believe I’m agreeing with an editorial in The Nation. I’m a New Republic girl! I really think the crux of this story is that Angelina spoke out on an issue that was particularly embarrassing for the Thai government. However, Jolie took all of the appropriate routes to visit the refugee camp (as she always does). I really think the UNHCR was using her for her star-status to make a political point, and that’s why the UNHCR spokewoman is standing up for Jolie now. Most likely, Jolie was asked by someone within the UNHCR to make a public statement on the Rohingya travesty to jump-start an international debate on these particular human rights.
Angelina Jolie is shown at the BAFTA Awards with Brad Pitt on 2/8/09. Credit: WENN
I’m glad she’s bringing awareness of this issue. good for her!! Human rights violations should always be brought to light — and fought!
i don’t know how fair it is to criticize the thai government – isn’t it the burmese government that the criticism belongs to? it’s not like thailand is the most stable, secure and wealthy nation; it’s very arrogant of us americans to think that they should just accept responsibility for burma’s expelled citizens. if anything, it also delays any global response to burma to stop abusing and expelling their own people. angelina has no place making thailand look so bad on a global stage for something burma is doing. but she probably didn’t think about it that much. anybody who read her article in the economist knows she (and her ghostwriter) doesn’t grasp nuanced and complex situations such as this.
Oh boy.
I second that. I am very glad that they’re finally getting the recognition they’ve been deprived of for years!
Yes, it’s sad that it took a celebrity to go in and say something for people to bother to take notice, but I for one am glad it’s out there.
And I think AJ is a great person for bringing awareness. Hopefully action is next. No one reads the news, but we sure love to read our trashy gossip don’t we?
*waits for AJ haters*
the poop – I agree with you entirely on The Economist article.
My issue is this: If a celebrity wants to be a spokesperson for some issue or another, fine. Great, I get that it brings attention to the matter when it’s needed.
However, I don’t think someone like Angelina Jolie is deeply involved enough to really understand the issues. She has been running around to awards shows, filming, raising 6 children and promoting her movies. It would be impossible for her to find time to really read up on the host of refugee issues facing people across the world. So if she wasn’t explicitly told by the UNHCR to make that statement, I don’t think she should’ve. I don’t care if she felt moved by the plight of these people. Visiting with (another set of) refugees for a few hours and getting your picture taken does not an expert make.
It sounds like she wasn’t told to make that statement – the UNHCR official said: “SHE was extremely touched by the plight of the Rohingya people. SHE expressed the hope that the human rights of the Rohingya people will be respected just as the human rights of everyone in the world should be respected.” That doesn’t make it sound like it was initiated by the UNHCR.
A senior civil servant does what senior civil servants do and tries to deflect attention away from their government. It’s news, but it’s not a surprise.
Amnesty International constantly gets this. They’re in an odd bind as technically the organisation in each country is supposed only to comment on another country. But ocassionaly when it comes to refugees a branch will comment on its own member state and the politicans and officals will go for the jugular as here.
The Poop, I think you’re making an interesting point there, but it’s my impression that since the that section of the UN deals specifically with refugees and it’s not in their remit to discuss the other state. In this case, since they are political refugees in Thailand, they’re asking the Thai goverment to ease their plight.
Another branch, such as the UNCHR would be a more likely body to deal with the cause of the conflict in Burma/Myanmar.
It might better serve Jolie to simply speak as a private citizen. Her role as a, “goodwill ambassador,” issued a pass to enter this area, does not include political commentary as a job description. The complaint was valid.
I don’t have a dependent need to rely on a celebrity for information about the world in which I live.
this is EXACTLY why what celebs do with UNHCR or the UN is so worthwhile.
I had NO idea who the Rohinyga refugees were before this happened. she goes there, opens her big mouth, and because she is a high profile celeb, her comments are reported on, pissing off the Thai dude, who is being a dick anyway, and then he gets reported on, and then the nation does a whole piece on it, and i never would have known about this issue previously. this was nothing high profile prior to this.
Is it possible that she was asked about the Rohingya refugees by a journalist or at a press conference and she gave what she thought to be a response that toed the UNHCR party line? (it thought it was “towed” too)
Despite what we may or may not think of the Goodwill Ambassador programme or even AJ herself, I must say that despite trying to be informed, I hadn’t heard of the Rohingya group at all before this. Will it make me donate to the UNHCR? – dunno, I donate what I can when I can to a number of groups.
I’m not a big Jolie fan, but she does do some admirable things. Atleast somebody had the guts to speak out about the issue and completely agree with Annie. But I still think if she wouldn’t make such a big spectacle out of her life (selling pics of her childern) she might be taken more seriously.
I don’t have a dependent need to rely on a celebrity for information about the world in which I live.
Which is great! 🙂 You, however, fall into a very small minority of Americans unfortunately.
Also, I don’t think her statement was all that controversial. She simply remarked that it is important to consider these people’s human rights. She doesn’t have to know the entire plight to express her desire for them to get the basic rights we are all afforded as citizens of the world. (I’m hoping she does know the details, but she doesn’t necessarily have to in order to be justified in making her statement).
I believe the first lines of the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says:
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world…..that human rights should be protected by the rule of law
thank god there are some sane comments here!!! there’s hope…
agree with poop and chiara.
honestly,each side is entitled to their opinion here-both thailand and unhcr. [and jolie,of course,but her visit was preapproved,and she really should stick with the talking points.]i love holier than thou american attitude sometimes…not! [yes,i’ american]but seriously,why doesnt the US jump into every dispute known to mankind? why dont we allow every mexican immigrant who wants to,come across the border and have a go?
It sucks,but it’s reality. You sometimes have to do a cost benefit analysis and play a numbers game on these things…
and what if they come to Thailand-these ‘boat people’? other burmese think “great,thailand’s a safe country,let’s go.” And then what? so they are alive,living in a refugee camp. And then in 20 or 30 years,Jolie will be at THAT camp,commenting on how sad it is that these burmese refugees were born and married at that camp,and can’t Thailand do more for them,give them more land or help,more education?
Seriously,American policy/opinion is SO short sighted sometimes; and we as americans are all about instant gratification. Rome wasn’t built in a day,you know. There are ramifications to actions,even when they seem right or benign at the time. Thought out planning ahead goes a long way….
[yes,i know this was jolie not the US gvmt;I’m just making a point that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.]
The Poop: I remember reading that article and I didn’t think it was horrible.
I’m not saying it’s a work of literary achievement, but it displayed an understanding. Is it as complex as the ones made by sociologists who spend their lives studying this? No. Does it take into account the complexities of government and politics? No.
But you know what it does show? It shows a desire to want to end violence. A desire for peace and stability.
I agree 100% with Thailand. Jolie should mind her big mouth. Burma should be held accountable and why the tax payers of Thailand host these people.
You dont sit with a refugee problem like a lot of other countries with the added crime which accompanies these people. And you can argue the point till you are blue in the face, refugees are illegal entrants. Eventually they demand equal rights to the citizens of the host country which they are not entitled to and still the tax payer will have to foot the bill.
The United Nations are hiding behind a bully like Jolie to do their dirty work until someone shuts her up. And that’s going to happen. She needs to heed caution – she’s got little ones on board and she talks too much.
A learned fool is more foolish than an ignorant one.
Re: who should get the blame for the “boat people” – I agree, Burma/Myanmar started the situation, and they should get the bulk of the criticism. However, Jolie was operating as a tool of the UNHCR, an organization that merely deals with the refugee aspect, not the geo-political clusterf-ck aspect.
From The Nation: “But hiding behind diplomatic protocol doesn’t hold water, especially when the country is in a public relations mess following reports that our security forces have pushed hundreds of Rohingya boat people back out to sea. Some have been left unaccounted for while others have given heartbreaking accounts of mistreatment by the Thai military, which towed them back out to sea in ill-equipped boats with little food and water. Another blow to Thailand’s image is the fact that the Indian navy, which has rescued Rohingyas, repeated their stories to the world.”
Thai is embarrassed because they got called out for a particularly disturbing human rights situation, as they should be. And I’d still be willing to bet Jolie cleared her statement with the UNHCR officials beforehand.
… and yet Sharon Stone lost all her endorsements for the ‘karma’ comment.
*joking*
It’s a sad state of affairs that celebrities often serve as the ‘global mouthpiece’ but I’ll take that over ignorance any day. If people are influenced to educate themselves on an issue because a movie star highlights it, then this holds merit. Jolie is in an unusual position because her brand is synonymous with global aid work and has been for a number of years. Maybe because of that, she doesn’t irritate me as much as the celebs who over step the mark with their uneducated comments. Political discourse is best served by the politicians and NGO experts.
Thailand has kept these people in “camps” for over 20 years and refuses to let them out to seek an education and prevents them from improving their quality of life. Dragging the others back out to sea without food & water is a crime against humanity (in my opinion). I understand that Thailand is a poor country but isn’t most (if not all) of the money for these refugees from groups like the UNHCR, and not the Thai government? I read the comment she made and it wasn’t controversial, she was just expressing her hope that the Thai goverment would reconsider its actions. I was unaware of this situation (along I’m sure with many other Americans) before she went there. As sad as that fact is I am glad that she is so dedicated to these voiceless thousands and will probably make a donation to the UNHCR because of her.
why dont we allow every mexican immigrant who wants to,come across the border and have a go?
I believe California, New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and Nevada were all part of Mexico prior to the Mexican-American war.
And I believe when it was convenient for us, we employed their cheap labor by the millions with no regret until they suddenly wanted to be treated like *GASP* Equal Citizens!(read: BRACERO PROGRAM.) HOW DARE they want to be treated as equals, everyone knows they’re clearly not. They are only here to be exploited by us. 🙂
So I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here, but it seems to be falling flat. And seemingly out of place in this particular thread.
AJ should at least take the time to learn her history and why the refugees are their in the first place before she voices her controversial opinions…If the refugees are from Thailand then yes they should be held accountable for their citizens, if they are from Burma then that country should be held accountable. We cannot expect certain countries to be held accountable for other countries issues. Yes the UN should step in and force Burma to take accountability. Thailand is not a rich country and they are justified in feeling anger for her comments. Yes Jolie made public what is happening there, but hopefully in time there will be a resolution to the problem..but again, she gets to fly home on her private jet, to her multi million dollar homes, what has been resolved? anger by the Thai officials!! More controversy for AJ, helping people is one thing, what she is doing is making a public appearance and moving on…giving these people false hope for a resolution..Burma is the problem, not Thailand!!!
Um. Are you forgetting the part where they towed these people out to sea and cut the line, leaving them to die?
They should be held accountable for that, no?
As Kaiser and I and others said – they are political refugees, the “responsibility” for them in this case is different than say refugees from a natural disaster within their own country/state.
Each case is different, but here they are fleeing FROM an autocratic military junta (which has kept its democratically-elected leader under house-arrest for years, to which point she couldn’t attend her own husband’s funeral in London) TO Thailand. By paying Thailand to host these people the Junta would be legitimising their claims – which is just not going to happen. There is a vast difference between them and economic migrants, who may or may not be illegal aliens as you term them.
I understand the concerns about burdens to the state coffers, which I hope the Red Cross/Red Crescent the UN and others are helping as much as they can to ease the burden on Thailand. But the possibility for a political or solical crisis causing people to take refuge away from their homes can happen anytime (ask European Jews) or anywhere (ask the people of New Orleans and Louisiana). Nobody knows if one day one will be in need of asylum.
yah good call annie-I had no idea what that mumbojumbo comment about mexicans and US intstant gratification comment was all about.
and faye, we hold other nations accountable all the time for how they treat their refugees, otherwise, the UNGCR wouldnt exist, would it? there is scrutiny on refugee ‘camps’ or prisons in the UK, everywhere else in Europe, and certainly in the UK. refugees lucky enough to land in developed nations have the backing of a sound legal system by which to plead their case for refugee status.
what is important here to remember is that these people have not had the legal proceedings begin on their refugee status: that is, the right to not be a refugee anymore, after 20 F’ing years, and get out of the refugee camp and begin life as a thai citizen. this is such an obvious point that you are missing.
other places, more devloped, and in places with the rule of law CANNOT leave people in refugee camps for 20 years, nor can they two refugees out to water to die.
i dont care if it was george bush himself or even hitler who was advocating on their behalf: these people are living subhuman lives and deserve something to be said!
Finally…I totally agree with this article. She loves the photo opts doesn’t she. People calling it like it is! ; ) She is such a phoney!!!
Kris:
February 11th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
the poop – I agree with you entirely on The Economist article.
My issue is this: If a celebrity wants to be a spokesperson for some issue or another, fine. Great, I get that it brings attention to the matter when it’s needed.
-I guess holding the title of United Nations goodwill ambassador really doesnt stress how much more knowledge she knows about this subject then other celebs/people others does it?
Angelina is no Audrey Hepburn, and she’s no Mia Farrow…..two women I admire who chose a path and committed to it. This women seems to want us to believe that a person can have everything at once….and can do it all perfectly. I call foul.
Didn’t both those women also use their celebrity to showcase a cause….
Not to get all preachy, but I think that the real issue with the Thais, who have been housing thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodian and Burmese for decades, is the faith of the Rohinyga. They are Moslem, and Thailand is an exceedingly Buddhist country – most of the displaced that have lived in Thailand have been either Buddhist, animist ot atheist. Thailand perceives Moslems as a threat to its social order – witness the problems in Thailand’s south, where most of the Thai Moslems live. There is no doubt in my mind that Thailand would not have cast off those boats if they had been full of any Burmese other than Rohinyga. Thailand gets a good bit of money for their efforts from the UNHCR and other UN agencies. It is a violation of human rights to screen out because of the asylum seeker’s religion, and it is totally proper for the UNHCR and its Ambassador to remind the Thais of this. And hoorah to Angela who can do and say things about a host country that foreign mandarins cannot. She is a hands on, informed and articulate Ambassador, and has been useful for the UNHCR’s profile and fundraising. And it’s worked for her too! End of lecture!
Isn’t it the responsibility of the Burmese government to take care of its citizens? Why is Thailand being criticized for not welcoming refugees who have no ties to the Thai people? What human rights activists fail to acknowledge is that they would not want thier own county letting in every person in need and relying on its own citizen to support them in the form of government monies (which come from taxes). Should the U.S. allow illegal immigrants to flood in simply because they “have nowhere else to go”? The harsh reality about refugees is that governments do not want them because they are a social and economic drain on productive members of society.
If Angelina’a words brought the plight of those people to the attention of a bigger audience, then she has done a good thing. A very good thing.
Whichever government is at fault, some country should exhibit a shred of humanity and a conscious and let those people come home. I know Israel and Palestine get all the attention, but thanks to Angelina Jolie (of all people) we are reminded that atrocities against mankind continue to be committed, day in and day out.
Taking care of citizens, even the “unproductive” kind, is just part of being a civilized society.
If she is not careful she may one day walk in Jane Fonda’s shoes. Governments love to use celebrities to further their particular brand propaganda and one day Jolie may unwittingly due their bidding and look just a complete and utter fool.
Re: Annie “didn’t both those women use their celebrity to showcase a cause….”
Yes, indeed, they both took on the cause as their life work, after they had succeeded at their careers. They didn’t dip their toes into everything — movie star, mother, and humanitarian. Barbara Walters once said that on thing feminism did wrong was it gave us the myth that women can have everything. She said yes, you can have everything, but not all at the same time.
The UN has become very politicized and while Angelina has the right to be a spokesperson for any company or organizatio, she is basically helping them to cover up their corruption and political motivations.
I don’t think that a women who has had 6 children in 3 years, doesn’t spend more than 3 days in the same country and has worked non stop in promoting her movie and shooting 4-5 films in the past 2 years, have spent enough time to study the specific case, to make such statements.
Angelina should rethink how she is used by the UN for obvious very political reasons.
I think Angelina should apologize.
She doesn’t have the education, doesn’t live there, doesn’t speak the languages, spends a couple of hours with cameras and makes such explosive claims?
I mean- a day before she was working from dusk till dawn in promoting her movie in Japan.
She doesn’t know enough to even pretend to make basic claims, so to go off and claim that Thialand is responsible for refugees from Myanmar that Myanmar doesn’t let it- is unbelievable.
I think she can be involved by giving money and help these poor people themselves.
Angelina has more money than some of the poor countries in Asia and Africa, and yet, she always talks about how other people should take care of something.
She has the resources and if she really wants to help- she can do it easily.
Not sure what she should do to help, actually, other than bringing more attention to the issue. It’s not like she can adopt entire refugee camps. Hell, we owe it to other humans to at least be compassionate. Why the nasty attitude over A.Jolie when there are people being towed out to sea and left to die in leaky boats? Odd how that little situation doesn’t even register a blip on some of these comments. We sit here on our computers and some commenters choose to make snotty remarks about someone who is shining a spotlight on a real crisis. Most of us here would consider loss of internet service a FEMA event.
I have no real comment about this topic as I have no opinion about it but can we stop with the *waiting for Angelina haters* nonsense?
This “blood feud” between the Jen people and the Angelina people is really really really stupid. If someone wants to express their particular opinions about a particular person, they are entitled to do so without someone openly mocking their opinion with a disclaimer about how they are “hating”.
NotBlonde – I think you know as well as anyone that it’s that “feud” that fuels these threads, not anything of any real meaning.
I refuse to believe that actual, functioning adults really put this much real stock into a couple of movie stars. The only explanation is the thrill of the argument.
So, calling out the other side with words like “haters” is what makes these threads what they are.
I also don’t need a celeb to inform me of the plight of the world, I can read a newspaper, and find whatever I need on the Internet. She wasn’t there for that purpose, so she should NOT have made the statement..IMO
“Not sure what she should do to help, actually, other than bringing more attention to the issue.”
So, poor people need more “publicity”? Is that what you’re saying?
I am pretty sure they need financial help and things that cost money.
Angelina can certainly buy them all they need.
What they really don’t care about is “getting more attention”.
When you are hungry you need food, not more attention.
But I can totally understant why someone like Angelina would think that everybody’s needs revolve around getting attention and press.
The sad truth is, if a country treats it’s refugees well, they’ll get more. Witness the Palestinian situation – Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, etc… all refused to give equal rights to a group of people who moved there and who were ethnically and religiously no different to them because they wanted to force them to go back to the West Bank/Gaza.
I hear AJ’s living in a mansion worth 10s of millions of dollars while she films “Salt”. It must be nice to preach to the world, exploit genuine human suffering for some positive PR, then go back and live in luxury “earned” through aesthetics and a famous dad…
What’s she got to say about the persecution, imprisonment, torture and murder of Falun Gong adherents? What’s her position on Tibet?
Thailand is easy pickings. Does Jolie, the UNHCR – or anybody else for that matter – have the balls to go after China?
God, that wanton excuse of a nation is right up there with Israel on the “untouchable” list, isn’t it?
I dare her to go and sort out Nigeria and the DRC.
I double and triple dare her!!!
Argumentum ad ignorantiam
I think the fact that China can, and probably would, blow yo’ shit up is what keeps anyone from actually doing anything there. Even China is not immune to bad publicity over human rights violations.
China wouldn’t issue her a visa. Period.
boom – I hear ya.
Notblonde – unfortunately those who wouldn’t bother their @rses commenting or who would comment positively if it was another celeb tend to rip seven bells out of AJ regardless of what she’s doing.
Re China – unless those prisons holding Falun Gong and other dissenters are refugee camps, then it’s not in the UNHCR’s remit to enter or comment on them. That’s closer to the UNHCHR (High Commissioner for Human Rights) rather than the High Commissioner for Refugees.
While the OHCHR are carrying out reports etc, it seems that Amnesty are the main ones publically banging the drum over that issue and Tibet.
Just today, the Thai PM just admitted that they have been pushing the boat people “out to sea” for awhile now. That’s not the way to handle refugees!
They are people not animals.
Oh. I said that because there are people that love to criticize AJ no matter WHAT. And then turn around to those defending her and calling us Jen haters.
I actually adore JA. I think she’s sweet and funny, and the one time my friends met her, she was extremely nice to them (Perk of being a Californian I suppose)
For me, it’s not a AJ vs JA thing but for others it is, so I’m just waiting for it. Like Ned. LOL
She is really doing what is easy–criticizing a foreign country under the umbrage of the UN. Why not take on human rights in the Unites States? Because she would actually have to take responsibilty for her statements and activities. Why not stand up for people who are here illegally and have been treated inhumanly? Because it would be a political nightmare for her. But in this capacity, she can go to some poor country and take pictures with the poor refugees and then go home to her mansions with very little fallout. She does it for her own advantage.
greenchile: what a good point you make!
But which advantage? The more she acts, the more people insulte her.
When I read your comments, it seems that you are interested or that you do something for less fortunate.
I work with these organizations, and we have much pain in order to find people that help us.
It makes me to anger when someone is insulted because he tries to act. Perhaps Angelina doesn’t make it in the better way, but at least she tries to do something.
Many refugees are dealt like beasts, but nobody knows, because many idiots are convinced no to speak about it. And many people think that beneficence must be made secretly.
I say no, we must scream what happen to the entire world.
The problem is not what Angelina makes or doesn’t; because a single person cannot do that much; the problem is what you do or don’t!
To be informed is not enough, you must act.
Angelina make it for publicity?????!!!!! Well, we should pray more stars to make self promotion in this way, if this can bring food, hope, or just a smile to these people.
For you it is nothing, but for them it is importante to see that someone leaves his comfortable life in order to spend time with them. Not because it will change the life, but it put a smile on their faces. For one day they are at the center of the attention.
You must be in that situation to understand.
Amen!!!
Albeit admittedly, there were some grammatical errors but the point rings clear:
That any notice is better than no notice. Any attention, is better than none. Because the truth is, people don’t care if it doesn’t concern them.
My father, in fleeing communism, had to sit on a dinky ass boat for months with 200+ other people and he was helpless as they all died one by one because they were given maybe a week’s worth of food and water. A WEEK. For a trip that would easily take…..a couple weeks or months even. And he survived by boiling sea water and doling out a teaspoon of water a day to his shipmates (note, manymany died). A TEASPOON, can you selfish people who spend your time judging survive on a teaspoon of water a day? And that was if they were lucky. They used parts of the boat to boil the water and they had to eat raw fish for some kind of sustenance and my dad says other things happened but that he doesn’t like to talk about them.
Think about THAT.
And all she said was “Think about these people’s human rights” and you’re all acting as if she’s gone and incited violence and revolution against the Thai government.
Anaïs: Well said, as if anyone would go all that way for attention they could so easily get right here. Angelina is doing the best she can and knows to do, those people don’t know or care who she is, just that someone who is listening to them if only for 1 day.
Annie: glad he was strong and that you have sense and compassion. I am sure he has an amazing story much respect to him.
I really wouldn’t pay that much attention to bitter losers crying on the internet about someone else’s audacity to do charity work. Anyone who does something positive should be applauded. Most of Hollywood is so incredibly self-absorbed that they wouldn’t travel across the world for free much less to do charity. Bottom line–she is doing something positive, and the rest of you are NOT.
Well said, anais. Any effort, regardless of who it’s by, is what’s important. Publicity is what puts issues in the public eye and opens them up to scrutiny. Jolie’s under no illusions that she herself can single-handedly bring about change but she does know that her focus throws an international spotlight on them.
The energy and time people put into criticising Jolie’s humanitarian efforts is beyond pathhetic. There are things she can be criticised for, this is not one of them.
I really don’t take this woman seriously. I don’t need her to care or be aware of the world around me. Millions of people contibute to the world and do much than she does. I also hate how if something is said about “Holy” Jolie, it’s your soooooo jealous and evil blah blah blah! Ummm I’m not jealous of her or anyone else. Geeze I get so sick it. Angelina needs to keep get all the facts before she opens her mouth.
hello there and thank you to your information ? I’ve definitely picked up something new from proper here. I did then again experience several technical points using this site, as I skilled to reload the website a lot of instances previous to I may just get it to load correctly. I were brooding about in case your web host is OK? Not that I am complaining, but slow loading circumstances occasions will very frequently impact your placement in google and could damage your quality score if ads and marketing with Adwords. Well I am including this RSS to my email and can glance out for a lot extra of your respective interesting content. Ensure that you replace this again soon..