Angelina Jolie met up with her BFF William Hague, the former Foreign Secretary, yesterday in London. Hague and Jolie are still very much involved on initiatives for preventing sexual violence in conflict. They have traveled to refugee camps together, they hosted the Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict last year in London, and it was said that Hague was the one to recommend Jolie for the knighthood from the Queen.
Yesterday, they gave evidence to a parliamentary committee – the committee that “examines Britain’s efforts to prevent sexual violence in conflict.” As the Guardian pointed out, the summit was criticized in Britain specifically because of the cost of simply hosting the summit (hosting the summit in London cost more than Britain spent on preventing actual warzone rape in 2014). But the larger goal of Hague and Jolie’s appearance at the House of Lords was to lay out the future goals for preventing sexual violence. But of course, when Angelina Jolie gives testimony before a parliamentary committee, even seasoned lawmakers find themselves going a bit starry-eyed.
A few of the noble lords and ladies tried to give the impression that hanging out with Angelina was all in a normal day’s work, but the general levels of tizziness betrayed their excitement. Lady Nicholson, the committee chair, could scarcely contain herself. “I’d like to offer a very, very warm welcome to our witnesses,” she said haltingly. “And could we thank Ms Jolie Pitt for giving the committee eight copies of her DVD, In the Land of Blood and Honey.” She didn’t say whether they had been signed or not, but we can assume yes.
Angelina looked unruffled by her appearance before the committee, but then as A-listers so obviously inhabit a totally different world from the rest of us, it was hard to know what she was thinking or feeling. But she smiled at the right times and was unfailingly polite, and apart from one slightly false note during which she felt obliged to mention the many brilliant and talented people she had worked with during her career – though, it was still a long way off the full Kate Winslett – she didn’t put a foot wrong.
Which is more than can be said for one of her co-witnesses. William Hague is normally one of parliament’s most assured performers; urbane, witty and on top of his game. But there was something about Angelina that turned him into a stuttering ingenue.
Maybe he was annoyed that another witness, Lady Helic, had been placed in between him and Angelina to diffuse the sexual chemistry, or maybe he was just struggling to contain himself anyway, but Hague could barely utter a coherent sentence and blushed throughout. “Angelina and I,” he muttered demurely on several occasions, lowering his eyelids in private reverie.
Does The Guardian sound a bit bitchy? Sure. But I also think that this kinds of appearances do work for a number of reasons. There are a list of tangible things that Angelina wants from the international community, from the UN, from any nation engaging in armed conflict, and this kind of appearance helps steer those conversations to Angelina’s agenda. And make no mistake, she really does have an agenda. Even if everyone gets fluttery around her, by now we should all know that Angelina knows what the hell she’s doing.
Angelina also wrote an op-ed this week about European refugee crisis, mostly from an influx of Syrian refugees escaping ISIS. Go here to read part of her essay.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Team Angie!
A vote for Saint Angie is a vote for women! Love her!
Yep if a beautiful, intelligent and nice woman does something – it’s always put down by men and some women due to various of reasons.
Angelina has done a lot more to women kind that those in Hollywood who call themselves feminists and girls girl.
As Gandhi has said – be the change you want to see and Angelina is doing exactly that.
#alwaysteamAngie
She is coming up on 15 years of her Humanitarian work.
The naysayers can go and choke on it
Angelina is Awesome. Love Her!
You go Ange.
I love this woman.
Absolutely Angie!
The House of Lords, isn’t that by nature a place for being in a tizzy and fluttering?
Sixer, please advise?
I tend to think of it as a place to shout at things until you’re blue in the face like a toddler, but I reckon there’s probably an official way of phrasing it.
#Brangeloonie4eva
Well, that would definitely cause a tizzy
Haha.
Ok. Firstly, an HoL select committee (as the Guardian sketch points out) is not as important as a Commons select committee. But it does have a reasonably significant role – bit like Senate hearings, perhaps? But more as fact-finding attempts than attempts to scrutinise what’s already happened?
Secondly, dear Kaiser, the Grauniad piece is supposed to be bitchy. It’s what we in Britland call a parliamentary sketch and is a long tradition here. They’re rude and satirical and we have journos employed to write them, and only them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sketch_writing
Thank you for explaining that it was satirical Sixer! I have to admit I was confused. I thought the The Guardian fairly reputable (spelling mistakes aside), but that excerpt read like the worst of the Daily Mail.
Famous for its multiple typesetting cock-ups, we call it the Grauniad hereabouts! Oh. Just realised I already did that. Ha. So ingrained, I typed it automatically!
Sixer, thank you for explaining that. It makes a lot more sense now.
These days, I think it’s more of a place to go after your three hour martini lunch at your private club and fall promptly asleep during the speaking.
Seriously I just love this woman; beauty, brains, compassion and grace.
We need more people like her as role models for kids because the airwaves have far too many trashy Kardashians and others of their ilk for my liking.
All this!!
Well said!
Agree.
“…lowering his eyelids in private reverie.” LOL. If Angie ever reads any of her press, she must get a real kick out of it.
But, she deserves accolades for the work she does.
HoL’s = Lots of smug, unelected rich people doing absolutely nothing. I hope Ange can make them see a change is urgent.
THIS.
i think Baroness Helic brought up good point about the immediacy and the need to draw up new protocols to provide a different kind and/or more support for asylum seekers and refugees who have been victims of such violence; and it is even more prevalent now with the wave of refugees coming into Europe and countries like Lebanon etc.
the refugee crisis is real, immediate, and pressing, and these victims–who are one of the most deserving of any help we can give refugees–could easily be lost or further traumatized in the chaos, which is really the last thing they need.
and Angie brought up a good point about value of self. and i think it is applicable not only to victims of such crime during war but also in non-war countries everywhere. if we continue to turn a blind eye to the victims, or doubt the victims, or worse, guilt trip the victims/ridicule/joke about their plight, what kind of message are we telling them about their worth?
Channel 4 news last night had a long report on how the refugee crisis opens up opportunities for sexual exploitation. It was horribly depressing but enlightening.
+ 10000, well said deb. At points like these we have an opportunity to decide and define who we want to be by our behaviour towards the most vulnerable people on the planet. It breaks my heart and hurts my soul to think we have the mealy mouthed little gobshite that is David Cameron steering the country at a time like this.
That picture recently of the Syrian child who drowned and washed up on the beach was one of the most heartbreaking pictures i’ve ever seen and it sent shock waves coursing throughout Canada when it was learned that the family had been trying to seek refugee status here. I think it may be the downfall finally of our prime minister in the election this fall. If anyone is bringing attention to the tragic state of the displaced Syrians than it can only be a good thing…and Angelina has proven time and again that this work is something she takes seriously so love her or hate her….she’s out there trying.
sassy, actually, this example of the drawned Syrian boy is not about refugees but greed. The family lived comfortably in Turkey for 2 years, supported by the father´s sister from Canada. The father decided he wants to Europe to get more (new teeth). So he took his family with him on the boat you would not use in a swimming pool, let alone on the sea. The refugees dont want to stay in the first safe country, they want to get to Germany mainly and to other west european countries. Sad, but true.
thank you – i keep hearing that suggestion, but then who KNOWS whats going on its such a shit-mess. i presumed that perhaps Turkey was urging the refugee exodus? (or forcing it?)
The little boy’s father had been tortured by the Assad regime during a 5 month detention. This included the pulling out of his teeth. We are aware by now, are we not, that Assad is a Bad Man?
The sister in Canada wasn’t supporting the family in comfort in Turkey. She was borrowing from friends and family to make a sufficient fund for the Canadian authorities to accept him into the country.
The family had had one stint as refugees in Turkey subsequent to the father’s release from detention, which he had secured through a bribe by selling his shop. You know; his livelihood. But Kurds don’t get good/any employment opportunities in Turkey and the United Nations relief effort has only been 35% funded by donor governments so there is little aid support. So they returned to Kobani to make the best of it there.
Kobani, as you may know, has been the frontline of a battle between the Kurds and ISIS. During this, 11 members of the little boy’s extended family were murdered by ISIS. The US-led coalition fighting ISIS bombed Kobani into smithereens (you might like to Google some images), including destroying the family’s home.
So the family went back to Turkey as refugees. They wanted to make an asylum application for Canada, and the sister living there had raised a fund to support it. But Turkey treats Kurdiah refugees as stateless persons and will not issue them exit papers. Canada refused the asylum application because it only accepts refugees with the right paperwork.
So the father decided to try to get to Europe, where receiving agencies will assess claims and will issue the correct paperwork (that Canada requires) once refugee status is established.
This was the family’s third attempt at the crossing.
And if they had made it, perhaps yes, they would have got to Canada. And perhaps yes, the Canadian health system would have replaced the teeth the father lost to torture.
The father has now returned to Kobani for good. Because he sees no point in a life in Canada (or some new bloody teeth) without a family to make a life for.
But if you want to believe that those nasty Middle Eastern savages are prepared to sacrifice their children’s lives for a set of shiny North American veneers, you go right ahead.
(What we might better ask is why that little boy? Why last week? It’s not as though dead toddlers haven’t been washing up on beaches for the best part of a year already.)
Stinky – I don’t think the countries with huge Syrian refugee populations (Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan are all hosting in excess of a million each) are actively urging an exodus to Europe. But they are creaking under the strain of hosting so many people.
Lebanon, for example, has a million plus refugees being coped with by a native population of about four million. They can’t cope financially or with the social tensions generated and have just issued a ban on refugees working because the domestic population needs the jobs. This means the refugee population is entirely dependent on aid. And, as I noted above, the international community has funded only about a third of the humanitarian requirements. The UN’s World Food Program has halved the value of its food vouchers, which are now at $13.50 for an entire month. It’s also cut almost half a million of the refugees from its program entirely. Fuel vouchers are like gold dust.
And this is why we can expect the next huge influx of people trying to get into Europe to be from the Lebanese camps.
What we do about all this is obviously open for debate. We can fund the camps properly to stop the exodus. But will our own populations be prepared to give that level of aid? We can accept hundreds of thousands of refugees into our societies. But will our own populations be prepared to accept such numbers? We can bomb more. But that will probably make more refugees in the short term if not the long term, too. We can withdraw from bombing. But that will leave ISIS (and Assad) a free hand and probably create more refugees as people run from one or the other of them.
No clear answers.
But one thing is certain. There’s a tsunami of desperate people fleeing religious extremism, war, political persecution or even just poverty. And wishing them away won’t make it so. Neither will reducing the problem to a set of false teeth.
That article was sexiest and bluntly ignores the topic in hand.
Some journalists have to demean whatever Angelina does simply by using her beauty and celeb status against her.
I saw the live parliament questioning and it was very professional and everyone was polite. They were not starstuck in any way and asked hard questions about this initiative which Angelina, William and Arminka answered intelligently.
It seems that people willingly ignores the amazing changes this duo has done to millions of women & men with this sexual violence prevention initiative.
Until they created this and hosted that convention which had over 130 delegates, ambassadors and humanitarian works from across the world, rape during war was never classified as war crime and the rapists went free.
This convention got 80 plus countries to sign a declaration supporting the initiative and try and give those millions of victims justice.
And yet here are people claiming Angelina has an ulterior agenda. If that agenda is to help as many victims as possible then I wish for many more powerful individuals to develops the same ulterior agenda.
PS: for the record, this convention only cost 5 millions while the G8 convention held last year in UK cost 100 millions and the talk was about military use. And a year later, the Western military weapons are still not being used against IS. The sexual violence initiative convention has bought changes with just 5 millions while the other one cost 100 million and has done nothing.
Maya – as I noted above, the article is a parliamentary sketch. These are satirical pieces posted every day in British newspapers about the goings on in Parliament. It’s not meant to be taken as anything other than a mickey-take of a Hollywood A lister going to see the crusties in the Lords.
Exactly. And should not be taken as a personal attack/ slight against Angelina Jolie.
Ann Treneman in the Times is a master (mistress?) of the art. Everyone is fair game and her personal politics are irrelevant.
some of Jolie’s more…uh…”ardent” supporters often have trouble distinguishing a cheeky poke of fun from actual slurs or attacks. they have the sensitivity chip in spades but the humor chip often tends to malfunction.
as for the subject matter, I think it’s wonderful that she dedicates her time to these causes. her celebrity can always bring more attention to these topics than just another politician making a speech about it. you go girl – put those bureaucrats in a tizzy!
Doofus: here you are again acting all sanctimonious and attacking us fans in a subtle way but personal way.
If you have such a problem with us umm “ardent” fans then there is a simple solution – just skip our comments.
my reply was not sanctimonious as I was not acting morally superior to anyone. it was simply observant and accurate.
by all means, keep posting and I’ll keep reading. it’s always entertaining.
Although isn’t it ironic that the piece builds up and focuses on some sort of “sexual chemistry” between them…
When, in fact, Jolie-Pitt and Hague are there specifically to bring attention to the very serious problem of sexual violence in the refugee crisis?
While I can appreciate satire, given the nature of the occassion and cause, this piece seems pretty tone-deaf to me.
“It seems that people willingly ignores the amazing changes this duo has done to millions of women & men with this sexual violence prevention initiative.”
.
Amazing changes? Really, Maya?!? Have these victims seen/experienced their justice?
.
Bless her heart…. I appreciate what she is trying to do, but handing out DVD copies of LOBH, totally negates the purpose.
And calling her Saint Angie doesn’t help either. This “duo” may try but there’s is no tangible results. I think he glommed onto her and Angelina likes being considered a great humanitarian.
meme, it is only the haters that call her Saint Angie. They have an agenda to call her that. And to both of you, all you need to do is read posts on here from those caught in the war zone and from 2 aid workers that posted to see she achieves an ENORMOUS amount. Far more than you are willing to admit or give credit for. This is why she is so well respected in the Diplomatic corps.
I think that was the joke. I watched this whole thing yesterday, and they mentioned ITLOBAH, as a catalyst for the start of PSVI (Lady Helic watched it, and then had William Hague watch it), nothing more.
@rainbowbrite
check up top. 1st response to 1st comment – Saint Angie
@Judd: just because you claim that there are no progress it doesn’t make it right.
I have heard several women saying that they are happy about this initiative and that their cases are now being processed in their countries.
So should I listen to a biased person like you or the people it actually affects/affected?
Maya, and just because you are claiming there has been progress, does not mean it is true. So, your point in saying that Jolie has helped these victims, is void.
.
Show me where justice has been given for these victims.
.
Yes, she has brought awareness, but one would have to live under a rock to not know or, be aware of the atrocious acts being committed. But handing out DVD’s of your failed movie, and having photo ops in these refugee camps, does not create JUSTICE.
@Judd Your snide remarks like St. Angie, saying she’s gives out DVD’s for her failed movie, and her creating photo ops in these refugee camps takes away the validity of your argument. You sound completely unbiased. (Sarcasm)
Paige, I realize reading comprehension is not one of your strongest assets, but before attacking me, make sure you know what you are talking about. Otherwise, you look foolish!
.
@Judd You said you appreciate what she’s trying to do but you don’t think what she’s doing is creating results because the people in Syria haven’t received any justice. Adding on to that, your exact words were, “But handing out DVD’s of your failed movie, and having photo ops in these refugee camps, does not create JUSTICE”. I’m just going by what I read. Since I pretty much read every other Angelina Jolie article, I’ve haven’t missed your usual comments about her weight, her looks, her charity work and her relationship. I guess there is another person with your name on here.
Whoa y’all. Take a breath. I have to say however, its a bit early to start claiming that these initiatives have had no effect. Real change takes time. President Obama said it wonderfully on the Mark Marin podcast a few months back…something to the effect of when you want to make lasting changes in government, policy, whatever, you can’t expect to just to in and “steer the ship” hard over at say 60 degrees, you have to steer the ship 10 degrees, so that in fifteen years time, it will have steered itself that 60 degrees. I think that is a perfect analogy for a problem of this magnitude.
She is one of the few “celebrities” that actually puts in time and not just a T-shirt,photo op,quick instagram message and life goes on. Think what u want of her but in this she is above all. Mia Farrow has done amazing work, so many either s but the media picks up on the ones who look good and are popular.
kind of like how the media chooses to immortalize Audrey Hepburn as a pretty face and mostly “forgot” to mention about her considerably extensive humanitarian career as well.
whenever i see a “tribute” or a mention of her in whatever list of achievements etc, her humanitarian work is usually completely left out.
Whenever I think of Audrey, I almost always immediately think of her work with UNICEF.
yep. i’m with you! i think that should be one of her lasting legacies, as well as the time when she danced to raise money for the Dutch resistance.
she did have some iconic roles and those were ones that gave her her fame, but i think what she did before and after her film career should be lauded even more imho 🙂
Duchess Kate, pay attention. Angelina has six kids and a Hollywood career, but she still finds time to visit refugee camps, lobby people in power, and do PR for the causes she supports.
But, but, Kate Middleton made time in her busy schedule to meet with Angelina Jolie. She may think she’s done her bit now.
I found Duchess Kate’s fangirling over Angelina soooooo funny, but it definitely made me question whether Normal Bill and Kate have ANY insight. Angelina Jolie is, in many ways, an admirable woman who has educated herself over many years about the plight of refugees and the issues they face in finding shelter and ultimately being resettled in a new country. Kate has dozens of charities who would LOVE to educate her about their causes and how she can bring much-needed attention to important matters like children’s mental health, but she cannot (or mode likely, will not) be bothered to do her bit – unlike her celeb crush Ms. Jolie.
This. You would think she would get the hint. Personally, I think that the British public has sort of given up on her. Shell of a woman.
But Angelina doesn’t make sketchings of her kids.So there! they are even.
#sarcasm
Actually, I’d bet she does! Based on all the pictures and sightings of her with the kids buying art supplies, she seems very into arts and crafts.
I think the JP kids are making sketches of her as they did on her wedding dress…and cooking as they did their wedding cake…and traveling with them to their home countries…and learning what life is really like in so many others.
And Kate? She has the opportunity to do so much…yet she can’t or won’t even leave the house.
But could Angeline draw a snail? I think not…
L.O.L.
SHE should be president !!!
I just read her essay on the refugee crisis and there’s one thing I can say: she’s a good politician. Her essay is so far away from exposing any real kind of situation that Europe is facing with this refugee crisis. She has no idea what’s happening ‘in the field’.
Countries in Europe in which citizens earn 200 euro a month will be forced by the European Commission/ Germany to make efforts to integrate refugees. And it will happen, efforts will be made, not one person that I know wants to give the cold shoulder to people that need help but how can the poor really help the poor?
Not to mention the fact that the refugees have made it clear that they don’t want to live in Europe, but in Germany and Austria (which is where I would like to live as well!!!). How can the EU countries take refugees if they don’t want to live in other European countries except Germany and Austria?
The fact that only 2 (Germany and Austria) out of 28 countries in the EU are looked upon as symbols of welfare is telling to the success of EU policies in all the other states.
So, yeah, Angie has an agenda. Right now, her agenda is BS!
@ALS …
This woman actually visits–spends time–in refugee camps. ‘That’ is how she knows “what’s happening in the field.” She visits refugee camps and then reports what she sees. This has been her M.O. for the past 15-years. Where is the BS in that?
I think als meant “in the field” as in what’s happening in the EU countries, rather than what’s happening in the refugee camps (which are in Turkey, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon).
That said, Angie DID address that point. She didn’t solve it … but I don’t know that it’s something that can be solved. But she made a point of saying the refugee crisis “poses political, social, economic and security challenges for EU countries. When this is voiced, it should not be simply dismissed.” So I don’t think als’s criticism is fair. She’s acknowledging the issues.
Public housing built to house lower-income Germans has been taken away from many of them to house new refugees. In most cases, the ejected Germans have been given older barracks with poorer conditions to live in, so they’re not outright homeless, but a few of these working poor have been reduced to homelessness so that refugees can be housed.
Most of the people entering Europe are NOT refugees, but “economic migrants.” There is a difference. I have all the sympathy in the world for people fleeing ISIS, but something like 1 in 10 is an actual such refugee. The rest are simply taking advantage of Europe’s open door policy and handouts.
How do you explain the videos of “refugees” literally throwing food and water back at Hungarian officers trying to hand these things out? Or the rampant theft by “refugees” documented by a Polish travel blogger, leaving roadsides piled with food, clothing, and other goods? People in dire need would not throw food and water back at people trying to distribute it. I know they wanted to go to Germany rather than Hungary, but if they’re so desperate to escape ISIS, then surely Hungary would do?
Why aren’t the wealthy Arab nations taking these people in?
Why is no one pointing out the irony that is inherent in a largely Muslim population fighting for entrance into Western countries, which have been largely decried in the Middle East?
In June, students at a Bavarian elementary school were told to stop wearing skirts so as not to “incite” the Muslim camp of refugees literally right next to the school. Um, no. When Westerners visit Muslim countries, they are expected to adhere to local standards of dress and conduct. The same should apply to Muslims who are guests in a Western country.
While not presenting specifics, I thought her speech generally addressed the infrastructural, social and economic problems of dealing with the refugee influx, no?
Ah yes, in her speech she said about how refugees fleeing should be given status over economic refugees…………
NYMERIA, YOUR LAST PARAGRAPH, THAT IS WHAT I FEEL, TOTALLY. sorry for the caps lock oops!
Since people have mentioned it, I want to expand/comment on the difference between economic migrants and refugees.
It sounds like it’d be clear cut – you’re fleeing war/persecution or you’re looking for a better job/lifestyle. But, in practice, it’s nowhere near that simple. Several reasons for that.
1) A Nigerian migrant might initially leave for economic reasons, but a common route passes through the Libyan war-zone. So when they flee Libya, it’s as a refugee. On the other side of the equation, a Syrian fleeing the civil war is an obvious refugee. Most people would also have sympathy for people fleeing a refugee camp. But some of the Syrian refugees made it to Turkey etc., had a job and housing, and then decided to go to Germany/Sweden. At that point, most people would classify them as economic migrants.
2) Refugees and economic migrants often show up with no passport/identification. (Sometimes it’s lost in transit, but mostly it’s intentionally destroyed because they think it’ll prevent them from being deported if their refugee claim fails.) Initially, that leads to huge processing delays while officials try to investigate refugee claims. Later, if a claim is rejected, it does make it extremely hard for a country to deport the failed-applicant. A replacement passport would have to be issued by the original country, and if they don’t want you back there is no way for your host country to force you out.
3) War is pretty obvious, but the definition of persecution is vague. The general perception is that people from the Balkans are just economic refugees, but many of them are Roma who are definitely a marginalised underclass. Does their treatment count as persecution? Depends on the judge. I just read something about a Canadian study looking at acceptance rates for Roma refugee claims. The rate ranged from 78% to 0%. (Only judges who’d ruled on 20+ cases were included in the study.) Regardless of whether you think the Roma should be granted refugee status or not, that kind of inconsistency is obviously wrong.
Those are just some of the issues. There is no easy fix for any of this.
@Nymeria – These are my impressions as well. Furthermore, one of the dignitaries in my country visited the ‘refugees’ in Hungary (‘in the field’) and although he expressed himself in a more veiled manner, the idea was similar – we are more likely talking about economic migrants.
I agree with the rest of your points as well.
So, yeah, this European ‘refugee crisis’ has some question marks (BIG question marks) and Angelina fell right in those traps. However, even if she did visit ‘the field’, I doubt she would have come out and say what she saw – she has politician blood in her – Hollywood has political rules after all.
To be fair, it’s not Angelina Jolie’s job to clean this mess up but I am not sure why she had to acknowledge it – the ‘refugees’ are constantly on TV, there is enough media attention and her input only revealed how unaware she is of the issue.
I work in the Houses of Parliament, I was very professional yesterday, def didn’t run around the whole place trying to get a peek… That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
🙂
🙂
Oooh if you feel like sharing more I’m all ears 😉
On a massively shallow note she’s very very thin. On another note, always make friends with the security guards at work – they’ll let you look over their shoulders
Thanks!
no tizzy-induction for you, eh? tell us more!!!
Love Angelina…. Kate should be ashamed of herself. When you have a position of privilege, a platform where to speak to the world, you should use it as Angelina does and trying to make a difference. Kate has done nothing more than shopping really… How futile and irrelevant can you be?
AJ is a great humanatarian and all things above that have been said. But in keeping with the theme of what C/B is. Those two bottom pics ages her a bit. I understand her face is in motion but the pics do not look that great.
I don’t think she’s wearing any makeup. The lighting was kinda bad in the video, because I thought she had dark circles under her eyes, and in the pics I can see she doesn’t.
I hope young women –and men– learn to just stay focused on doing good works in life and to pay zero attention to your naysayers. Angie reinvented herself because of an entirely internal motivation. She didn’t need the money or the fame. She has educated herself about many global issues, given of her celebrity and personal time, and done incredible good with her life. She appears to be fearless and completely undaunted in the face of flip criticism. Her strategy for dealing with her critics is the best one of all: she has no strategy, she just steps right over the yappers, gives them zero oxygen, doesn’t waste one ounce of energy defending herself or her actions, and gets on with it. Brilliant.
I hope every little girl takes note.
May I agree with your comment a trillion, trillion times.
She isn’t looking that great any more.
Oh please. Do you really believe that given the cause she’s supporting – the sexual exploitation of women and children – that she gives a flying eff what she looks like? Her humanitarian work makes her rather more valuable than her mere appearance don’t you think? Or do you still honestly believe that a woman’s worth is indelibly tied to how she looks, that regardless of her accomplishments she should still be judged on how ‘hot’ she is?
oh my!
I think her looks have bearing on her visibility as an activist and she would probably acknowledge that herself. There are thousands of people doing more work than she does, and you probably couldn’t name even a few because they’re not famous and beautiful.
I bet even now she still looks greater than you Rada.
hahahha. probably.
when she gets gussied up for the RC, she still looks pretty damn great. this venue doesn’t call for glam and she knows it.
she looks fine, if a bit tired. but who wouldn’t be with the schedule she appears to keep.
The pics are not that great. Nothing wrong with pointing that out; people do it with all the other celebs.
we are all not getting any younger and will die one day … so?
The top picture(with Hague) is when she was in the midst of her double mastectomy treatment,had her tissue expanders in and no one knew anything about it.
Parliamentary sketch writers and this site can be as bitchy as each likes, but the genie is out the bottle, you can never drag her down to your level.
The Guardian sketch actually made more fun of William Hague, but he has a thick skin too.
Water and ducks backs come to mind.
If Jolie is a ‘great’ humanitarian, what is Bill Gates, Gandhi, MLK, Schlindler? Jolie tries but she doesn’t accomplish much.
Oh? So they can’t ALL be great humanitarians? Why can’t ALL those people be great humanitarians? What is this, some sort of competition in your mind?
Angelina achieves a lot. All you need to do is read posts on here from those caught in the war zone and from 2 aid workers that posted to see she achieves an ENORMOUS amount. Far more than you are willing to admit or give credit for.
Show me some tangible results and I’ll give her credit. I see more refugees than ever.
So you want personal details of people she has helped? Having read your previous posts on her, not even concrete evidence from the people themselves would satisfy you, lets be honest.
@rainbowbrite — you don’t have any concrete evidence of what great things Jolie has achieved as this “great” humanitarian because there isn’t any. Has she brought awareness to her fans? Yes, and they only care because she cares. Whatever bandwagon Brangelina jump on, their fans jump on too.
@meme : yawn.
.
I bet you could do more, get on it! not just criticise!
Rubbish, meme. There is plenty of evidence around. Google the UNHCR. I am not going to do your research for you. There are also many private cases. Look into it yourself. She brings awareness to the world – her fans are only a small group of that. But you are too jealous, spiteful, petty and small-minded to see that.
Apparently in your world there can’t be more than one humanitarian.
Funny you also didn’t point out any FEMALE humanitarians. So are only men allowed to be called great humanitarians?
PS: do you even know what the word humanitarian means? It means someone who is concerned or seeking to promote human welfare. Angelina has been doing exactly that for 15 years.
Well, since I named a few APPARENTLY there are numerous “great” humanitarians in “my” world. Big whoop, I didn’t name a female. You want one? Oprah Winfrey.
Just because you idolize Jolie, doesn’t make her “great”. The world great is tossed around way too much.
Again, why can’t they ALL be great? Angelina is well-respected by the highest echelons in the Diplomatic community. I don’t believe any of those still living in your list are. That settles it right there. It certainly qualifies Angelina as great. She has certainly done more than Oprah, who ‘gave’ cars to her audience but the audience could not afford to have them because they had to pay the tax before they drove the cars out! Taxes worth as much as the cars.
@ meme
Well her work in Cambodia for one. Here’s another one on a personal level Lena Babic and many others finally got a home after 19 years of living in reugee camps in Rogatica after Angelina brought attention to the issues In Rogatica. What about all of the schoos she built so girls in Afghanistan,Cambodia and Africa can get a education.
It’s funny that you Bill Gates because they have a charity together.
All of the people you mentioned as well as Angelina Jolie-Pitt are all great humanitarians no one has ever said otherwise nor does her being called one takes away from their achievements. You just seem to have a problem of people calling her one.
the only people who call jolie a great humanitarian are her fans.
@meme
I forgot to add that government officials in Rio de Janeiro have credited Angelina Jolie’s open ed about her BRC1 and BRC2 gene and from that the rise of women who are now asking to be tested or if they should be tested.
For the new law that’s being passed in Rio de Janeiro that allows SUS one of Brazil’s public health system to perform free BRC1 and BRC2 testing on women who have a high number of cancer in their families.
Well Meme – the people who awarded Angelina various humanitarian awards beg to differ.
Thank you, KellyBee, for while we hear news of Angelina visiting countries in crisis and bringing attention to them at international summits such as this, it’s not often (enough) that we get specific examples of their accomplishments…
(No matter how big or small, they made a significant difference in someone’s life.)
meme, it seems you’re focused more on her celebrity and that of others (Oprah?) rather than what these people have actually done, changes made and goals achieved.
@meme
“the only people who call jolie a great humanitarian are her fans”. You are absolutely wrong. I’ve seen several people online and I know people that think she is a great humanitarian, even the people that say they don’t really care for her appreciate her humanitarian efforts. Several celebrities and others who have donated time and money to various charities have given her praise for her work and have applauded her for being a wonderful humanitarian. She was given the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award just two years ago. What are you talking about?
@Rainbowbrite – Why the need to tear down one woman to compliment another? To dismiss Oprah Winfrey’s charitable efforts to the cars is so disingenuous. You’re part of the problem here, why not try being part of the solution?
And since certain posters take daily notes on the J-P threads, please note that this post is not negative to the J-Ps in any way shape or form, no matter how my words are manipulated.
meme, now you are just being so childish and stupid. Many world leaders call Angelina a great humanitarian. Are they all fanbots? Christ, try to THINK before rushing to attack her because of your preconceived prejudices.
mayamae, now you are being disingenuous, petty and immature. I have always felt that way about Oprah, and that incident with the cars was well-publicized. Mentioning a known fact is not going tit for tat. I didn’t do it with the others, did I? Just reminding people of a known fact. Please grow up.
your reach could get us to the moon.
She evidently impressed the Council on Foreign Relations enough to admit her as a member. In case you weren’t aware of it, membership in the CFR is by invitation only. Google their list of members sometime, it’s quite impressive.
I wish people would stop talking about her looks or her star status, because she obviously is above it. Woman is doing her humanitarian work for years, but people still wanna have her mouth, her eyes, but not follow her great example.
I agree. People are quick to jump on those criticizing Angie’s appearance, saying – how can you concern yourself with the superficial on a story of such significance? What some fail to realize, is that it’s just as dismissive to comment on her beauty, when the story concerns her humanitarian work.
Thanks to everyone who said the above article was satire/a joke. I was kind of confused, because when I was watching the meeting a) I thought about how everyone was so incredibly polite (please and thank you’s after every sentence), and b) I DEFINITELY never heard anything about being offered free copies of Angelina’s movie. LOL!
That meeting cleared up a lot for me–well, sort of related to this site. I remember a few years ago, when ITLOBAH came out, and then again when it came out on netflix……a lot of posters (who were from around the area/surrounding countries) were talking about how the film was inaccurate about what went on in the war, during that time. Being that my school textbook devoted a whole two sentences to the subject (and no mention of rape being used as a tool of war), I honestly didn’t know if they were right or not. However, I googled Lady Helic yesterday, and she (and her family) fled the war. She saw the film, and brought it to William Hague. So I guess that’s enough confirmation for me.
And one thing that (I think?!?!?!) Angelina said, in that meeting, that struck me was that some refugees become refugees BECAUSE of the constant threat of rape. She told a story about this man who’d lost his wife and two children coming in on a boat in Malta, I believe. They were fleeing from Libya. And the reason that they were fleeing was because the man was scared/knew that if they stayed there, that his wife and two children were under the threat of rape. Every single day. So they fled. And his wife and kids died on the way there.
I never knew/realized that sexual violence/rape had THAT much of an effect on world issues.
And from what they said at the meeting–the hard thing about prosecuting is that a lot of times, there’ll be a ton of evidence for….genocide, use of child soldiers, etc…..but then only a few women come forward and say, “This despot raped me” or “This despot had his soldiers rape me” (she named someone specific, whose trial she went to)…..and then the prosecution won’t have enough evidence, so rape won’t be on the official charges–next to murder, etc. That’s the big hurdle they face.
Kudos to Angelina for caring so much! Obviously it is a subject very close to her heart. I find it odd anybody could criticize her for whatever she contributes to the cause. It’s obviously more than those sitting here complaining about her are contributing. As for her looks, she is so poised and graceful and will always be one of the most beautiful women because her beauty comes from her soul.
To a substantial degree her beauty comes from a very good plastic surgeon and from her genes.
As for her cause: she picked a cause nobody could seriously complain about except: her cause is too isolated and too custom-tailored to have any kind of significant effect.
Sexual violence is a crime nearly anywhere. (Yes, even Islam calls that a crime.) So nobody can argue against that. But Jolie fights only against sexual violence in war areas. What she doesn’t openly say is that that sexual violence in war areas happens to a large degree BECAUSE of the wars. If a war starts then the rates of sexual violence multiply.
The obvious solution would be to fight against the wars and those who start them. Jolie doesn’t do that and doesn’t even mention that and that is what I hold against her.
Angie is the real deal……love her!
Go Angie!!! She is truly passionate about her humanitarian efforts. She sure hasn’t spent nearly 15 years filing her nails, which is what some people want to believe.
I know Jolie has no degree in anything, or any other type of formal education, so she can’t actually do anything really helpful the way a doctor or a soldier or an aid worker could, but I’m getting sick of these rich famous people constantly organizing summits where they talk, talk and talk, without doing anything really. They all just travel and then talk. You never see soldiers or doctors endlessly talking all year round at various summits. It’s because they’re actually doing something in the field which will make a difference. Jolie’s endless speeches are mostly to make the West (and herself) feel better.
It’s one thing to publicly tell others what you think they should be doing. It’s quite another to be doing something concrete yourself.
I’m just sick of all the talk and no action. She’s one of the best useless politicians out there, and she’s a Hollywood actress. I mean, what does that say about our society…..
I don’t know what Angelina being an uneducated actress talking about serious issues says about our society.
But your comment clearly says that you judge someone on their education and profession.
So because someone is not educated then they don’t have the right to speak about an issue?
And if they are actresses then again that makes them not intelligent enough to talk about politics?
Jeesh, my entire comment is about doing, not talking, but you draw that conclusion….
I said she wasn’t educated enough to offer concrete actual help that would make a difference. Which is true. She does not know how to save lives because she’s not a doctor, nor does she know how to fight terrorists, because she’s not a soldier either. I’m not judging, I’m stating facts. I don’t know how to do these things either.
Though lets be honest, Jolie isn’t a politician either, yet she likes to pretend she is one.
But my point is that all of them (Jolie and her politician buddies) aren’t actually doing anything, they’re just talking and pointing the finger.
I bet that i fyou actually do some research, some of the best do-gooders in history have not had a college education.
Maybe professional politicians of nowadays do, but look at the past. Have they all gotten their university studies finalized before daring to help others or venture into a summit?
Even younger people like Malala, or persons like Princess Diana or Mother Theresa (even with criticism to what or how they worked) did not have formal higher studies or were stopped by that fact.
Kudos to AJ.
Yes they do in June for example in 2014 over 100 doctors and researchers died in a plane crash heading to Melbourne conference.
Doctors and ( FYI soldiers don’t go those types of thing they do what they are told to do ) military officials go to conferences and summits all the time. To discuss treatment, strategies, cures, research and more.
Oh ok, well that’s great, truly. I guess the media just doesn’t cover it as much as it covers these useless political and celebrity summits, which is a shame.
Actually they do cover them you just have to look. Military and doctors have been to thousands of conferences and summit and yet there is no cure for AIDS or cancer and there are still wars going on.
Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr who I am NOT comparing her to are examples of people who use their voice and ended up making a difference with or without a college education.
Not to take anything away from your comment Kellybee but Gandhi studied law at the prestigious Inner Temple, London and became a qualified lawyer.
He also used his law degree to fight for a separate seatings at trains for Indians in South Africa – whites didn’t want to sit with blacks and Indians, Gandhi didn’t want to sit with blacks so protested that Indians should have their own seats.
@KellyBee is right, but just for the record …
Martin Luther King, Jr. skipped the 9th and 11th grades and entered Morehouse College as a 15-year-old freshman. He graduated with a Degree in Sociology and then enrolled in Crozer Theological Seminary in 1951 in Chester, Pennsylvania … where he earned his PhD in 1955. He was already a Baptist minister of his own church the year he earned his PhD and was knee deep in the Civil Rights Movement. That same year, Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white passenger after a long day at work, and the rest is history.
I wasn’t pacifically talking about Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King jr when I made my comment about with or without a college education.
Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
A college education or a university education is VERY helpful if you want to make and impact. Those who deny that either didn’t enjoy one themselves or they don’t want others to enjoy one.
A.Key, what you’re saying is very contradictory, and your whining seems petty and ignorant in itself…
So Angie is not “educated”, and by that I’m assuming you mean as a doctor or aid-worker, but what you don’t get is that it takes all kinds to make worldwide change. She has compassion, and precisely because of her celebrity, she can speak and politick to get international attention, legislation, funding and also military protections necessary for those doctors and aid-workers to do their jobs.
If you actually think she does nothing, please familiarize yourself with an org called UNHCR who appreciates a whole lot of something she’s done for them the last 15 years.
As for her being just a Hollywood actress and “what that says about our society”, may I suggest you go back to watching the Kartrashians.
@ laura in LA
What you don’t get is that it requires a lot of education to make changes that are really efficient and effective. That little bit of political showmanship that Jolie does isn’t going much beyond advertising and PR. Real political commitment usually translates into millions of dollars to causes and think tanks and much more open and honest speeches about political issues.
@ moot
Are you kidding? Teach people to fish?
Fishing is an industry nowadays and if you want to make a living from fishing and not just eat the fish you catch then you need to do it on an industrial level. That means investments in the millions and access to the world market to sell. The latter is prevented by laws and the former won’t happen.
It’s a very common complaint when discussing world issues to say that things aren’t happening fast enough, people aren’t doing enough, and its all talk. But real change takes time, and radical change simply does not happen that way, especially at the international level….that’s not how things work at the political level. I refer you to a comment I made earlier about not being able to make radical change all on one go…it was President Obama’s analogy about steering a ship a wee nudge at a time so that the change is lasting and becomes a part of the matrix of our narratives.
It’s one thing to complain about things not being actioned enough, but that type of change that you speak of would require quite literally every single human on the planet to drop what they are doing and leap into action. Really, we haven’t seen an effort like that on the part of all of humanity since WW II, when it was out of necessity .I’m certainly not doing as much as I could, as are probably most of us. And ironically, I am one of those medical types that was referenced above as never needing accolades for their work. I’m not sure I agree with that sentiment either, but thats another thread entirely.
Fine rebuttal, Highland. Coordinating widespread change across borders and cultures isn’t as simple as travelling to a location oneself and digging a ditch or curing one patient.
The whole point is to (metaphorically) teach people to fish, not just hand out fish to everyone. And even before teaching them about fishing, those people have to want to learn and want you to teach them.
How do you help the most people? You have to mobilize a lot of resources. Who has the most resources? Not a celebrity. Not a surgeon. Not even a soldier. The ones who decide where millions or billions of dollars in resources go and how they are meant to help need to be talked at. They don’t just dish it out to everyone who needs it, and everyone does.
Action happens because people talk and convince others to join them in taking action. One person acting alone accomplishes next to nothing in the larger and longer view.
While I admit to having issues with Ms. Jolie, and am far from a superfan, I will give kudos where they are due.
I applaud her for taking a stand against ISIS and for being brave enough to publicly condemn them for raping women on an astronomical scale.
Wowzee, the lights are back in eyes. Imagine her access to the top 10%? Hillbilly Brad is sure out of his league..
Because of her exotic pedigree with those green eyes. The Brits must be losing their shit over her
I’m sure she’s taking online courses under a pseudonym and at least has her m.a. in political science or s’mthung.
Oh…I have a little tidbit for the Beyhive and Madonna stans. Not this year but last year Goop got her nose in a twist at the Vogue soiree at Lincoln Center. Used excuse of hot and sweaty. Yeah, sweaty alright. Why, cuz madge and bey discovered a past secret and held court at their table
Go ahead, figure out.
HINT: title to a Gibbs brother’ solo song back in the day.
Bwaha, Gwynet always gonna lose when you out your league, son.
Sidesplitting.
HINT: Acadia
Okay, you daft? Or from an another place?
Solange, my sister’s name too.
Copy celebitchies? I’ll send a c adeaux to the 1st one who figures out
Some people really don’t get what AJP or PSVI as a whole is trying to do for the rape victims of war & for those who would-be victims in the future. They are cynical just for the sake of being one. Remember, it’s still on early stage. That’s why it’s called INITIATIVE, through the voluntary & combined efforts of Baroness Helic, Former Special Adviser to William Hague, Rt Hon Mr William Hague, Former Foreign Secretary and co-founder of the Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative, and Ms Angelina Jolie Pitt, Special Envoy of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and co-founder of the PSVI.
Maybe some are negative at once about PSVI for the simple flimsy reason that AJP is involved. They just don’t like AJP and anything she does is given a side eye. I can understand that NOT everyone likes AJP and certainly she doesn’t aim to please everybody coz no one can. That’s impossible. Besides, she does her thing especially her humanitarian work without a personal agenda of being “liked”. She is passionate about her causes because she simply cares. That’s her agenda, to help the voiceless, the rape victims, the refugees in any way she can by using her time, effort & financial resources. Those people whose only reason NOT to give PSVI a chance are shallow if it’s because of AJP. Maybe those people have their own personal agenda themselves, that is, to destroy or to block whatever AJP is doing, regardless.
I hope the public will give PSVI a chance & appreciate their efforts somehow in urging the international community & all governments to unite to come up with real policy to curb the existence of sexual violence in war. I wish they would be objective enough NOT to think of the personalities who are behind PSVI but rather they should consider what good or benefits it can do to people around the world.
I would give AJP a chance if she had a somewhat more coherent approach concerning the victims of war and not just the victims of sexual violence in wars.
I wish people would be objective enough NOT to think of the personalities who are behind PSVI but rather people should consider what good or benefits it can do to people like Jolie and Hague and what good or benefits it could do for the world if people like Jolie and Hague had a more coherent political approach.
(My sentence above imitates yours, I hope you like it.)
Here’s the link of the ENTIRE or whole video when Angelina Jolie Pitt (Special Envoy of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and co-founder of the PSVI) appeared before the British Parliament & answered their questions together with Baroness Helic (Former Special Adviser to William Hague) and Rt Hon Mr William Hague (Former Foreign Secretary and co-founder of the Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative): http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/8bb696a2-d842-4ee6-a0f8-10cd0edece0b
***
Every time AJP delivers her speech or answers questions (easy or difficult ones), I can feel her passion. Her heart for her causes. Her words & phrases that she often uses are also easy to understand. No flowery words. Direct to the point but still courteous. It is what it is. She can easily speak her mind. Listening to her at the British Parliament, she really knows what she is talking about. She explains & gives examples about the struggles of rape victims. She gives suggestions & recommendations what are the things to be done to make the objectives & goals of PSVI a realization or how it is to be implemented. She asks the international community to work together in order to fight the perpetrators by making real policies. She conveys her message across effectively.
Seeing her talk, it makes me really proud that the person I admire & respect is doing her impressive thing once again…. giving a voice to the voiceless. Loud & clear!!! And on point.
Other people simply want “magical” solution regarding sexual violence in conflict and certainly that’s just fantasy.
PSVI is doing its work systematically with realistic ways. No one can find instant remedy to prevent sexual violence in war. It takes time. It cannot find solutions overnight.
In order to prevent sexual violence in wars I recommend to not support or start wars for starters. So stop selling weapons to them and stop supporting political groups who are willing to start a civil war.
Unfortunately there are some powerful individuals and groups and companies and their think tanks who want to exploit natural resources in foreign countries. So they start wars there in order to destabilize political order and civil societies and then they make arrangements with the respective local warlords / corrupt politicians / rebel groups and exploit whatever resources they find.
Unfortunately there don’t seem to be any celebrities or A-listers or high-ranking politicians who call to end the “business” I described above.
I am quite sure both Hague and Jolie know this and I am quite sure I have never heard them say anything on the matter.
They’re 4th cousins somewhat removed
No cadeaux pour toi!
Hey, what is going on?
Where is my comment?
I called out for Hague’s and Jolie’s hypocrisy: they support victims of war but they never call to not start any more wars.
It’s good that a lady from the British Parliament called out the writer through her letter on http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/14/angelina-jolie-pitt-did-not-leave-us-starstruck
Considering that the crass article in question is satirical in nature http://www.theguardian.com/pol… (John Crace’s Sketch: Hague Upstaged as Jolie Sprinkles Stardust), it was supposedly or meant NOT to be taken seriously. I can understand satire. HOWEVER, because of the seriousness of the subject matter and the cause, Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict…. and where the session or hearing was held (British Parliament), I think the piece is out of the line. Any cause of this HIGH LEVEL of seriousness must not joked at all, in whatever ways, forms or means. It’s simply out of bounds & beyond human decency.