Angelina Jolie Royalty Magazine

249 anonTotally agree with you. The reputable mags. are the ones that truly defines the great efforts of AJ in all the causes she advocates. All the tabloid cares is smut and more smut. You can just imagine what kind of reading materials some of these haters read. And where do they get those vile , harsh comments against AJ. WEre they already hissing when they came out of their poormother’s womb.

i just got my time mag,were AJ got two pages,it says 100 heroes and icons.

#252 Manners Miss jolie has been doing "GOOD WORKS" for 5 years.You don’t like Angelina which is fine,but don’t try to demean her humanitarian work because you have a personal problem with her.This woman has gone on over 25 goodwill missions on her free time in the last 5 years,what have you done to help others besides complain?

252 MannersIts way too, too , looooong ago since the split.Divorces is now a way of life esp . in HW. Extended families everywhere.Someone , somehow got tired of their spouses, found a better mate and of course happier than ever.No one can take a man from his wife if he is happy in their relationship.

I just want to add that had AJ wanted to do humanitarian work for PR purposes only she would focus all her efforts on working on projects in the US. As we have been told plenty of times, there’s a lot to do right her in the US so why doesn’t she do it? There are over 40% of Americans who are inadequately insured for medical and health insurance. Then there’s the handicapped kids, the katrina victims, the American Indians stuck on reservations, the orphans etc. If she were to throw the sort of energy into thos issues in the US, I’m sure she’ll get plenty of publicity. Plenty of benefit concerts to organise, plenty of photo opportunities to play in FRONT OF THE PAPS.What she has done is in fact the opposite. She has chosen to try and highlight those who are forgotten. Sierra Leone, Darfur (I mean, its not exactly in the news is it until the last couple of weeks), Bosnia, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Many of the places she visited were actually dangerous and NOT ONE OF THE PAPPARAZI WERE PRESENT. So, for someone who is supposedly a brilliant media manipulator, she’s chosen a lot of hard work with doubtful returns to focus her energies to generate good PR for herself. And do you know why the PAPS were not present in Sierra Leone and Darfur and other places?? FOR 2 REASONS:1) because NO ONE IS ACTUALLY THAT interested in reading about Darfur and Sierra Leone so, Paps don’t want to cover those stories so BANG, there goes the Photo Opportunity right?? and2) Because there is always the risk of being kidnapped, of being killed. Even that pseudologist, Laura what her name acknowledges that those would be dangerous places. Do you think the paps followed George Clooney and his father to Darfur recently? I’m sure there would have been plenty of Photo opportunities but nope, I guess it would have been better if Clooney and his Dad just attended a demonstration and a benefit dinner about Darfur in the Washington DC eh???

# 260 | Manners No Actually, it’s people like you who are so blind. If you look beyond your hate, you’d commend anyone who’s trying to do some good."Also, it’s always easy to throw money at something if you have oodles of it."Yes but not everyone does. You are so missing the point here, aren’t you?"she’s like a giggling school girl"Did watch the show on mute? Is this why you didn’t hear why she was giggling. She giggled when the interview turned personal. When she spoke about the she issue at hand, she conducted herself well but of course you won’t recall that part, nah it doesn’t fit with the picture you’re trying to pain."Admit it, you are just so caught up with Jolie because of her looks and the fact she took someone else’s husband who just happens to be one of the most attractive of men. You think it was her personality that took him? That’s laughable"Oh yeah, that is laughable. You actually do think that’s all this woman has to offer? Oh Lordy Lord, My dear, that’s is just an added bonus."She has a UN title she probably paid someone for, she certainly has enough money""And her Journals, hasn’t she made money off that? Of course she has, but you’ll say she Gave it away"Now, you are just being a Silly, Silly Child.

Hello #231 Anniston the Hag! I’m from Montreal, Canada and I was in Ontario last week-end to visit a friend.Poison_Cherry

I don’t understand folks like #260 who demean her contributions. I just read her book/journal: Notes from My Travels and it says right on the copyright page that all proceeds go to the UN High Commision on Refugees. I seriously doubt she could get away with siphoning profits off and gosh, do you really think she needs the money from the book? You don’t get paid much profit on a book–could be as little as fifty cents of as high as two dollars. Why the heck would she siphon profits off to herself? Mz. Manners, #260–I suggest you read the book. You don’t "buy" a commision from the UN to put yourself in the situations she has been in. You don’t go to the places she has gone if you truly are doing what she does for publicity. You don’t hold an amputee in your arms or a baby with aids if you are only doing this with publicity in mind (especially since there are no pictures of you doing so). You don’t cry because you are listening to stories of horrific rapes, horrific killings of children, horrific stories of the inhumanity man is capable of. And Mzzy Manners, what have you done to make the world a better place?

There are so many articles written on Brad and Angie where people have not done a lot of research but feel the need to write something about them now because it is the hip thing to do. This is a very sad development. There are people who even try to quote rags without quoting them accurately. Sad but true.

If the media were on the case years ago as they are today, the American public would have been more aware of the Taliban and the training camps going on in Afghanistan. Just think, Angelina was there when Osama bin Laden was still there!!!! Maybe, just maybe….with the world’s eyes focused on the horrors there, the purpose of the training camps…maybe……certain things would not have happened. But no…we all became experts on the Taliban & Afghanistan AFTER a tragedy happens. That’s when I saw footage of Angelina all over CNN back then. She had been in Afghanistan like only a month before. She knew the dangers before most Amercians did.

Gallup Poll- It seems we can’t go a day without hearing the latest escapades of America’s top celebrities. But, just what does the public think of some of these superstars? A recent USA Today/Gallup poll asked Americans to rate their overall opinion of five Hollywood stars — Jennifer Aniston, George Clooney, Tom Cruise, Angelina Jolie, and Brad Pitt. Americans have a more favorable than unfavorable impression of four of the five: Clooney, Aniston, Jolie, and Pitt. Clooney and Aniston, in particular, have strongly positive images. Among the three celebrities involved in what the media has dubbed the "Brangelina" spectacle, Aniston is viewed most positively by the public. Fifty-nine percent of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of Aniston, once Pitt’s wife, while 12% have an unfavorable opinion and 30% have no opinion. Americans view Pitt (42% favorable, 35% unfavorable) and Jolie (43% favorable, 28% unfavorable) more negatively, but both actors still have a net favorable rating. An interesting difference exists in the gender breakouts of ratings of the three personalities. Women view Aniston much more favorably than they view Jolie or Pitt. More than 6 in 10 women (64%) rate Aniston favorably, while women are more divided in their views of Jolie (40% favorable vs. 34% unfavorable) and Pitt (39% vs. 40%). Men are more positive than negative in their assessment of all three actors.Aniston, Jolie, Pitt Favorable Ratings by GenderMen %Women %Jennifer Aniston Favorable 55 64Unfavorable 13 10No opinion 33 26Angelina Jolie Favorable 46 40Unfavorable 23 34No opinion 30 27Brad PittFavorable 44 39Unfavorable 30 40No opinion 26 21Americans aged 18 to 49 are much more likely to have opinions (either favorable or unfavorable) about all three actors than are those 50 and older. Younger Americans are more favorably disposed toward Aniston and Jolie than older Americans, while Pitt is viewed similarly among both age categories.Aniston, Jolie, Pitt Favorable Ratings by Age18- to 49-year-oldsJennifer AnistonFavorable 70 46Unfavorable 10 13No opinion 20 41Angelina JolieFavorable 50 34Unfavorable 30 26No opinion 20 40Brad PittFavorable 44Unfavorable 38No opinion 18

It might be partially that her and JA are tight and partially with everybody mentioning AJ and her dedication to her humanitarian causes has gotten her dander up. She probably feels she gives just as much money as AJ, but, AJ gives money, time and effort. # 166 | cain+++++++++++++Actually, technically Oprah doesn’t give as much away as AJ does. AJ gives away 1/3 of her salary. If Oprah did the same she’d be even more unbearable than she is now. If Angie does 2 movies a year at $12MIL a movie, that’s $6MIL she gives away. Last year Oprah earned somewhere around $60MIL. Did she give $20MIL away? Not bloody likely. I don’t have any numbers on her, but if she gave away half that I’d be surprised. Why? Because Oprah is running a BUSINESS, that’s why. Above all things she has to make good business decisions to keep maximizing her earning potential. Oprah is probably very close to being a billionaire, if she isn’t already. That wench loves her status too much to give away 1/3 of her yearly earnings every year.

Well Said TINY DANCER. I think its pathetic to read some of this posts, there so misinformed and just plain wrong. You would think that the daily rag were their bible or something. Any thing that the Rags write about must be the truth and LAW!!!!!!!!!