George Clooney and Amal Clooney NOT Splitting

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 04:34

George Clooney, Amal Clooney NOT Headed For Split, Despite Report

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Gossip Cop
Andrew Shuster 1 day ago

George Clooney and Amal Clooney are not headed for a split, despite a bogus tabloid report alleging that distance is taking a toll on the couple’s marriage. Gossip Cop can exclusively debunk the supposed marital drama. We’re told there’s no truth to it.

Earlier this week, George and Amal celebrated her 40th birthday with a 24-hour getaway to Big Sur, California, but according to OK!, the spouses bickered throughout the entire trip. A so-called “source” tells the magazine, “They had an explosive fight just before they left, and they may have even cut the trip short because of it.”
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Gossip Cop (Getty Images)
The outlet’s questionable insider claims the couple’s relationship has been negatively impacted by time apart and busy work schedules, further contending that the actor has been “holed up” at their house in England working on his upcoming Hulu series, “Catch-22.” “George has felt a tremendous amount of pressure with his new project,” adds the suspicious source. “Amal started resenting his mood swings. She doesn’t see work stress as an excuse to act out.”

The seemingly phony tipster goes on to say that George is also having trouble adjusting to fatherhood and caring for twin babies, and he’s frustrated with “seeing how well [Amal] balances work and home life.” The “insider” adds, “George doesn’t want this to end in divorce. He and Amal are both hoping they can get back on solid ground.”

But Gossip Cop checked in with a source close to the Clooneys, who exclusively assures us there’s no truth to the tabloid’s account of the couple’s marriage, which we’re told is going strong. The actor and human rights lawyer never fought during her birthday trip either. Also, George gushed about his wife during a recent interview on David Letterman’s new Netflix show, “My Next Guest Needs No Introduction.” Regardless, Gossip Cop can confirm that OK!’s article is entirely fabricated.

It’s worth noting, Gossip Cop frequently calls out the publication for pretending to have insight into George and Amal’s marriage. In December, we busted the magazine for wrongly reporting that the spouses were expecting another set of twins just six months after the birth of their baby boy and girl. Naturally, this latest article alleging the Clooneys are having marriage problems fails to mention what happened to the new twins. Simply put, it’s all fiction.

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 04:39

This is a strange story too. I have not read any OK! article or any news article, tabloid or otherwise about George Clooney and Amal Clooney fighting or splitting. At the end of the article it states

"Naturally, this latest article alleging the Clooneys are having marriage problems fails to mention what happened to the new twins. Simply put, it’s all fiction."

Has anyone seen or read the article mentioned?

by carolhathaway Fri 16 Feb 2018, 06:30

Ladybug,
I've mentioned it here several times about gossipcom denying similar stories I hadn't read before. Since for me it's strange as well to bring up a story by denying it, but some here on COH then mentioned that they had read or heard about it. I guess some gossip magazine will always report about a rumor they've heard about someone.
This has nothing to do with investigative journalism, whole magazines are built around rumors. When I bring my kids to their physio therapist and have to wait 30 minutes, I sometimes read the magazines there. Gosh, you can't imagine the crap they're writing, it's unbelievable! It's always about 'reportedly' or 'a source', based on nothing else as hot air.

by annemarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 10:23

Every few months O.K or some other rag writes some nonsense about them. They seem to have taken his interview
and twisted to say he Amal is a great mom and he is having trouble adjusting to father hood.
As for the trip they were gone 24 hours without the twins of course they came back they obviously didn't want
to be away from them for a long time.
My guess is now that Jennifer and Justin have broken up George and Amal will be tagged to break up next. Peoople
read this stuff and believe it.

by Donnamarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 14:26

I hardly ever come across OK Magazine at the newsstands of stores I visit. I've seen no headlines suggesting trouble in the Clooney marriage. Gossip Cop does seem to quickly knock down any unsubstantiated rumors about George and Amal. Are they as conscientious about pushing back on rumors of other celebrities? Just wondering. But on the face of it they are doing a necessary service of righting the wrongs of these celebrity rags that just crank out these false stories and shabby reporting.

by party animal - not! Fri 16 Feb 2018, 15:10

Permanently surprised that anyone reads this codswallop, Donnamarie. Average content: soap stars and non-people, fictitious stories. Owner: used to run (maybe still does) strip joints and dubious clubs. Last heard on the grapevine that the editor rejects photos of anyone above a certain age............

by PigPen Fri 16 Feb 2018, 15:12

Once again, I'm totally confused. OK Mag never seems to get it right, don't know if they ran stories about George before Amal... YET, the newlyweds gave OK exclusive photos of the wedding ceremony reception, etc. If OK is so notorious, why give them an exclusive, regardless of how much $$$$ was offered up.

Not saying the mag rumors are true- just don't understand.

by party animal - not! Fri 16 Feb 2018, 15:22

Er, sorry, no, Pigpen. They gave them to Hello and People for huge charity donations. OK likes to think it's in the same league - they deliberately have a cover that looks very similar. Not tho.

by PigPen Fri 16 Feb 2018, 15:35

Thanks for the clarification. Give Flowers

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 16:38

annemarie wrote:Every few months O.K or some other rag writes some nonsense about them. They seem to have taken his interview
and twisted to say he Amal is a great mom and he is having trouble adjusting to father hood.
As for the trip they were gone 24 hours without the twins of course they came back they obviously didn't want
to be away from them for a long time.
My guess is now that Jennifer and Justin have broken up George and Amal will be tagged to break up next. Peoople
read this stuff and believe it.

What's interesting in December I kept seeing stories about Jen and Justin marriage trouble and breaking up. Those rumors were always refuted. That's why I was so surprised when they put out an official statement they were separated.

Because of that series of events, I wonder if George and Amal are preparing the public for an upcoming split. I saw Amal on the Birthday trip, it was hard to make out George. I have not seen George Clooney and Amal Clooney together since the last red carpet appearance. I'm sure they are both busy with work and family. If I recall, the twins debut is in May. I'm not sure why May was preset, however, I'm looking forward to their debut.

By the way does anyone know where George Clooney is? I'm going to start a: #Where is George Clooney? Yahooooo

I crack myself up. Not really, I don't even know what a "#" really means, I just hear people talking about it.

As life moves on I can only hope the best for George Clooney, Amal, and the twins.

by Donnamarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 18:07

Ladybug, the pix at the airport for Amal’s bd included sightings of Amal and George. I definitely made out his image.

George is quite good at staying out of sight at times. Shouldn’t he be working on ‘Catch-22’ about now?

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 18:29

Donnamarie wrote:Ladybug, the pix at the airport for Amal’s bd included sightings of Amal and George. I definitely made out his image.

George is quite good at staying out of sight at times. Shouldn’t he be working on ‘Catch-22’ about now?

I'm sorry Donna, I could not make George Clooney out in the Birthday pictures. I really hope George is working on "Catch-22". Do you know where? I thought filming would take place in Italy.

by Lilia Fri 16 Feb 2018, 18:40

The twins debut is in May ?? I never heard about it

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 19:16

Lilia wrote:The twins debut is in May ?? I never heard about it

I'm pretty sure, Annemarie mentioned the twins debut is in May. I know Amal will be hosting the Met Gala in May, I'm not sure if that has anything to do with the twins debut.

by annemarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 19:38

I never said the babies would debut in May. There is no way I would know this.

George was in the pictures at the airport with Amal he was seen carrying a garment bag.

Ben and his wife were also with them.

If I'm not mistaken Amal next Friday is speaking at an event so I think that and George working is why they are in the U.S.

by ladybugcngc Fri 16 Feb 2018, 20:50

annemarie wrote:I never said the babies would debut in May. There is no way I would know this.

George was in the pictures at the airport with Amal he was seen carrying a garment bag.

Ben and his wife were also with them.

If I'm not mistaken Amal next Friday is speaking at an event so I think that and George working is why they are in the U.S.

Annemarie, I've looked and could not find George Clooney in the pictures. Can you post the picture you are referring to.

I was sure you stated the twins would debut in May. Maybe I misunderstood you; I will try to find the post I'm referring to. It was around the same time the Amal Clooney Met Gala hosting job was mentioned.

How would you know they are in the U.S.? Is George Clooney in Los Angeles?

Is Amal speaking somewhere in the States? If so where?

by annemarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 20:58

I think I read she is speaking like I said I may be mistaken. She is speaking in April in Austin Texas.

I assumed they are still here since we haven't heard they left.

But heck they may have gone and it wasn't reported so I can be wrong.

by Donnamarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 21:29

Amal is speaking at a conference in San Jose on Feb. 23rd and as annemarie stated she is speaking in Austin in April. I’ve never seen any info about George and Amal ‘debuting’ the twins. It makes sense that they will try to keep the twins out of the public eye as long as possible. Don’t think they are interested in having their children make an official first appearance.

by annemarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 21:46

Thank you Donnamarie I knew I saw it, I couldn't remember where though.

by premiere Fri 16 Feb 2018, 21:52

I think that Gossip Cop debunking random rumors by tabloids is a publicity ploy. The last few times Gossip Cop did this, I hadn't heard or read these rumors at all. If this story is from just one trashy magazine why don't G & A ignore it? The only thing that makes sense to me is that by publicly denying it, their names get back into circulation.

by party animal - not! Fri 16 Feb 2018, 22:08

Ladybug, Google is really on all your queries. Everything can be found from any source if you just research there..............

by carolhathaway Fri 16 Feb 2018, 22:12

Premiere,
if an official rep for George and Amal had denied this rumor, gossipcom would have mentioned it. To mention 'a source close to the Clooneys' doesn't sound like an official statement at all.

To me this sounds like something that should be ignored because every bit of attention they get is a waste of time and energy. (I know, why do I read this thread and reply go it if I think so...)

by annemarie Fri 16 Feb 2018, 23:03

George has said in his Hollywood reporter interview they have to eat a lot of things that are written about them. I think some of these things bother them no one likes to be lied on . The last rumor was repeated and copied all over the place even though it was denied. I think they simply wanted to nip it in the bud before it got out there .

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 02:07

Donna and Annemarie, it was my understanding the twins were going to make their debut in May. I could be wrong; I'm still looking for the post.

I find this Gossip Cop article extremely odd. Maybe it's just me. A George Clooney/Amal Clooney story of fighting/spliting up is picked up by every tabloid on earth and outer space. Not only did that not happen, I have not seen the one OK! article Gossip Cop mentioned. Maybe that's normal to all of you. It's extremely odd to me.

Both of you said you saw George Clooney in Amal's birthday Big Sur trip pictures.
I still have not seen him in the pictures. Can you post the Big Sur trip pictures of George Clooney you are speaking about?

by annemarie Sat 17 Feb 2018, 02:44

Ladybug go to Legion media put in George clooney. go down the page you will see amal she has the hat on there are six
pictures of her boarding the plane the next one is George he is carrying what looks like a garment bag.

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 02:49

Annemarie

Ladybug go to Legion media put in George clooney. go down the page you will see amal she has the hat on there are six
pictures of her boarding the plane the next one is George he is carrying what looks like a garment bag.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This is not George Clooney boarding the plane, right.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Is this the picture you're talking about? You're telling me this is a picture of George Clooney? There's no picture of George Clooney boarding the plane, however there is a picture of George Clooney exiting the plane?

by annemarie Sat 17 Feb 2018, 02:58

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

this is the picture this is George.

The other picture is Ben Weiss and his wife boarding the plane.

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 03:12

party animal - not! wrote:Ladybug, Google is really on all your queries. Everything can be found from any source if you just research there..............

PAN'

I wouldn't have pay it any attention, however, I saw almost the exact same breaking up stories about Jen and Justin refuted.

When I read Jen and Justin's official statement, I revisited the Gossip Cop article about George Clooney and Amal Clooney.

I thought the Gossip Cop article was similar to Jen and Justin, so I searched for the source they mention and could not find it.

That's the only reason I took the time to researched the mentioned source. Gossip Cop did mention the George Clooney and Amal Clooney story was all fiction, maybe that has some merit to the truth.

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 03:19

annemarie wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

this is the picture this is George.

The other picture is Ben Weiss and his wife boarding the plane.

This is a picture of George Clooney?

I saw they mentioned George, I did not think George Clooney made this trip.

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 03:24

Maybe because they are dressed the same, they look the same.

Well George Clooney or no George Clooney, it sounds like Amal had an awesome birthday, that's what really matters.

by carolhathaway Sat 17 Feb 2018, 09:35

ladybugcngc wrote:
party animal - not! wrote:Ladybug, Google is really on all your queries. Everything can be found from any source if you just research there..............
PAN'

I wouldn't have pay it any attention, however, I saw almost the exact same breaking up stories about Jen and Justin refuted.

When I read Jen and Justin's official statement, I revisited the Gossip Cop article about George Clooney and Amal Clooney.

I thought the Gossip Cop article was similar to Jen and Justin, so I searched for the source they mention and could not find it.

That's the only reason I took the time to researched the mentioned source. Gossip Cop did mention the George Clooney and Amal Clooney story was all fiction, maybe that has some merit to the truth.

Ladybug,
xou read the same story about dozens of celebrity couples every day, some of them are repeated nonstop. So if one of these couples actually does break up, these gossip magazines have been 1 % right and 99 % wrong. The magazines especially have a good chance since they know that about every third couple actually does break up. That' simple maths, theory of probabilities...

by Lilia Sat 17 Feb 2018, 11:21

People magazine- which we trust -mentioned that George accompanied amal during her birthday in California big Sur , now what gossip cop has denied about the trip is that they didn't spent 2M$ for her b.day + it wasn't in Figi but in big Sur

by ladybugcngc Sat 17 Feb 2018, 12:44

carolhathaway wrote:Ladybug,
xou read the same story about dozens of celebrity couples every day, some of them are repeated nonstop. So if one of these couples actually does break up, these gossip magazines have been 1 % right and 99 % wrong. The magazines especially have a good chance since they know that about every third couple actually does break up. That' simple maths, theory of probabilities...

Carol, you are right, that's why I found to Gossip Cop article interesting. I'm going to go with Gossip Cop:

It’s worth noting, Gossip Cop frequently calls out the publication for pretending to have insight into George and Amal’s marriage. In December, we busted the magazine for wrongly reporting that the spouses were expecting another set of twins just six months after the birth of their baby boy and girl. Naturally, this latest article alleging the Clooneys are having marriage problems fails to mention what happened to the new twins. Simply put, it’s all fiction.

Can you define xou?

by carolhathaway Sat 17 Feb 2018, 17:12

Ladybug,
sorry, 'xou' was a misspelling. I wanted to write 'you', and on our keyboard x and y are neighbours, so it's easy to misspell, especially when writing on a tablet and not on a proper keyboard.

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 15:07

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Were Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux ever legally married?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Wonderwall
Jed Dreben 18 hrs ago

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

AP/REX/Shutterstock Justin Theroux and Jennifer Aniston attend a Louis Vuitton event in Paris, France on April 11, 2017.
Oftentimes, real life is much stranger than fiction.

As news of Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux's imminent divorce continues to break, TMZ is now adding a new twist and/or angle to the already growing story, that, based on a records search, as well as sources, the pair may never have been married at all.

Aniston and Theroux's wedding went down at their Bel-Air mansion back in August of 2015, however TMZ checked marriage records in Los Angeles County, going back as far as 2010, and they are unable to find any record of a license. Now while there is such a thing as a confidential marriage license, TMZ sources say that the couple did not get one in L.A. County.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Image Press / BACKGRID Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux attend The Hollywood Walk of Fame Star ceremony honoring actor Jason Bateman in Hollywood, Calif., on July 26, 2017.
Okay, then, as the onion layers peel further, maybe they got a marriage license in one of the other 57 counties in the Golden State? Well, according to TMZ's Aniston insiders, who have been in contact with the "Friends" star for years, there has been chatter for a while now that the two were never legally married.

Even more, phew, TMZ has even contacted multiple divorce attorneys in their arsenal and not a one, as far as they can see, has been contacted by either Aniston or Theroux.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Splash News Jennifer Aniston was spotted looking gorgeous and happy while arriving to Jason Bateman's Star Ceremony in Hollywood on July 26, 2017.
Conclusion: it's absolutely possible the two are legally married, although with what TMZ found and/or didn't find, it's also possible that they are not.

Jennifer and Justin: A look back:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Slide 1 of 20:

Oh no, what happened? On Feb. 15, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] announced that they were separating after two years of marriage and seven years together. How did they get to this point? It was no whirlwind romance for Justin and Jennifer. Justin wasn't exactly a household name back in May 2011 when tabloids pegged him as the next Mr. Jennifer Aniston. He co-wrote "Tropic Thunder" and played John Hancock in the "John Adams" HBO miniseries, but let's be honest, this was his big break. It became official in June when the couple went public at an MTV Video Music Awards afterparty at LA's Soho House. They hugged, they kissed, and everyone started unsuccessfully trying to mesh their names together. Justifer? Theroniston? They don't quite work. Still, they were supposed to live happily ever after, but then they didn't. Click through to relive

Jennifer Aniston, Justin Theroux

Oh no, what happened? On Feb. 15, Justin Theroux and Jennifer Aniston announced that they were separating after two years of marriage and seven years together. How did they get to this point? It was no whirlwind romance for Justin and Jennifer. Justin wasn't exactly a household name back in May 2011 when tabloids pegged him as the next Mr. Jennifer Aniston. He co-wrote "Tropic Thunder" and played John Hancock in the "John Adams" HBO miniseries, but let's be honest, this was his big break. It became official in June when the couple went public at an MTV Video Music Awards afterparty at LA's Soho House. They hugged, they kissed, and everyone started unsuccessfully trying to mesh their names together. Justifer? Theroniston? They don't quite work. Still, they were supposed to live happily ever after, but then they didn't. Click through to relive their relationship...

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 15:31

Tmz are idiots, if it is private license there would be no public record of them applying.

They simply want to add drama where there is none.

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 15:36

annemarie wrote:Tmz are idiots, if it is private license there would be no public record of them applying.

They simply want to add drama where there is none.

How would you know that? Do you know Jen and Justin personally?

Are marriage licenses public record?
The marriage license is registered at the County Recorder’s Office in the county where the license was purchased, and is a public record. Anyone may request copies of the marriage license by submitting the required fee to the County Recorder.

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 15:50

No Ladybug this was a confidential license which means it is kept private. It is not part of the public record.

[size=48][size=48]What Is a Confidential Marriage License and Why Does California Offer Them?[/size]
BY SUZANNE RAGA

NOVEMBER 11, 2015[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

ISTOCK

If you’re getting married anywhere in the United States, the first step is to get your marriage license. The rules for doing so vary from state to state, with different minimum age, cost, number of witnesses, and blood test requirements. California, however, is the only* state that offers both a regular public marriage license and a confidential marriage license.
[*One other state, Michigan, has something called “secret marriages,” but unlike confidential licenses, secret marriages require a judge in a closed court to seal the court file, and the clerk has no record at all of the marriage.]
A confidential marriage license is legally binding, just like a public license, but it’s not part of the public record. Section 501 of California’s Family Code allows for the county clerk to issue a confidential license, and Section 511 states that these licenses are not open to public inspection, except by a court order. Public marriage licenses, on the contrary, allow anyone, for any reason, to look at the personal information that appears on the licenses at the County Clerk’s office. This information—the couple’s full names, dates and places of birth, parents’ full names, and any previous marriages—is private for confidential licenses.
But why does California alone offer this option? The origin of the confidential marriage license goes back to 1878, when it was meant for unmarried cohabitating couples in the state. Some of these couples lived in rural, remote areas that were inconveniently far from a church or court, but most simply “lived in sin” and/or gave birth to children out of wedlock. Shacking up was majorly frowned upon, so couples could maintain the appearance of respectability within their communities by keeping the details of their nuptials confidential. Confidential marriages were also a boon to the California legal system because inheritance and property rights were more clear-cut when the majority of people cohabitating and raising children were married.
Until the 1970s, confidential marriage was still an option, but it wasn’t widely taken advantage of as social mores shifted and it became less scandalous for unmarried couples to live together. In 1972, California state legislators changed the law so that laypeople, not just pastors, could perform confidential marriages, allowing couples to marry quickly (without getting their blood tested and waiting for the results) and privately. By the early 1980s, almost 1 in 3 marriages in California was a confidential one. Polygamists, minors, and people falsely claiming Social Security benefits took advantage of the confidential option, though, and the state legislature came close to doing away with it in 1984—it stayed alive by one vote. In 2012, approximately one fifth of all California marriage licenses issued were confidential.
To apply for a confidential marriage license today, a couple must swear that they live together, but it’s a technicality since the couple doesn't have to provide any proof and there is no required minimum length of time for cohabitation. In Los Angeles county, confidential marriage licenses are actually a little cheaper than a public license, but couples opting for the confidential route have to pay $14 to order a certified copy of their license and certificate, so the cost evens out. And since it’s private, no witnesses are needed to be present at the ceremony to sign the license. It’s not exactly clear why other states’ legislatures never added the option for a confidential marriage license after California instituted it, perhaps due to lack of demand. For now, if you want to get a confidential marriage license, you’ll have to do so in California.
Big Questions

FACEBOOK 291

TWITTER

EMAIL

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 16:28

Annemarie,

Thanks for the information. I did not know California had that rule.

How do you know that was the case with Jenifer and Justin?

I wonder if they made a commitment to live as a married couple, to quash the marriage talk relentlessly imposed by others.

As I've followed George over the years, marriage/romance was always the question. When George Clooney tied the knot with Amal, that question was quashed.

Given the Gossip Cop article maybe there is some merit to "simply put it's all fiction".

Do you know if George Clooney and Amal Alamuddin's marriage license is public record? Or is it private?

I have to admit with Amal obviously pregnant with twins and discussing her marriage, pregnancy, giving birth, and/or life as a mother it's hard to believe Amal's marriage to George Clooney is simply put "fiction".

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 16:40

Ladybug, I don't think George's license is public no one has ever published it.

And to me that is a good thing certain things should be private. I think that Celebrities have a right to privacy just as I do.

They shouldn't have to prove anything to anyone George and Amal , Jen and Justin have said they are married that to me is good enough.

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 16:55

annemarie wrote:Ladybug, I don't think George's license is public no one has ever published it.

And to me that is a good thing certain things should be private. I think that Celebrities have a right to privacy just as I do.

They shouldn't have to prove anything to anyone George and Amal , Jen and Justin have said they are married that to me is good enough.

Amal's pregnancy is something that could not be hidden it's proof to all of us.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

With all the talk of no marriage license and nothing from Jen and Justin refuting the reports; it makes me think a commitment to live as a non-married, married couple just might be true.

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 17:03

They wanted their license private why should anyone be allowed to see just because they want too. It is their private business.

Celebrities owe their fans only good products movies music etc. They don't have to share what for all of us who are not celebrities is private nor should they have too .

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 17:18

Ladybug, I remember when Sarah Duchess of York was being written about. She ran in to one of the writers for a rag. She asked why they wrote what they did. She was told that they sit around a table and simply come up with headlines that people will read. It is all to sell magazines or get t.v. views. You also have people who will sell a story that is not true for the money, these gossip sites and mags don't check sources . Saying George is happy doesn't sell saying he is unhappy does . People seem to love drama and to see others not doing well or a celeb who has everything miserable sadly gives them pleasure.
I believe the people when they speak if they are lying the truth will come out

by carolhathaway Sun 18 Feb 2018, 17:21

Their wedding certificate was published, it's on this thread:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And I do agree with annemarie: Celebrities don't have to share their private life with their fans. Just because many celebs do this and tell us everything on social medias, this doesn't mean that you have to do so. There are people who share pics of their pregnancy, from the positive test, continued by ultrasound photos and news about the baby's gender, pics of their growing baby bump, followed by pics of the baby shower party up to those of their newborn baby.
We are able to follow many peoples pregnancies from (almost) the beginning to the end, but we've got no right for that.

by annemarie Sun 18 Feb 2018, 17:35

Thank you Carol I missed that.

Certain celebrities love the attention and want to share every detail. To me there is such a thing is too much
information. Certain things should be private not all over the internet.

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 17:45

annemarie wrote:Ladybug, I remember when Sarah Duchess of York was being written about. She ran in to one of the writers for a rag. She asked why they wrote what they did. She was told that they sit around a table and simply come up with headlines that people will read. It is all to sell magazines or get t.v. views. You also have people who will sell a story that is not true for the money, these gossip sites and mags don't check sources . Saying George is happy doesn't sell saying he is unhappy does . People seem to love drama and to see others not doing well or a celeb who has everything miserable sadly gives them pleasure.
I believe the people when they speak if they are lying the truth will come out.

The news articles that question if Jenifer and Justin where ever "really" married is very different. I've never seen it before. Celebrities commitment to live as a non-married, married couple may be something that happens to quash all the "are you getting married questions".

Also everything about an A-List celebrity sells, good, bad, or indifferent.

Annemarie: "I believe the people when they speak if they are lying the truth will come out."

I've learned to question everything. If it does not make sense, it's probably not true.

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 18:09

carolhathaway wrote:Their wedding certificate was published, it's on this thread:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And I do agree with annemarie: Celebrities don't have to share their private life with their fans. Just because many celebs do this and tell us everything on social medias, this doesn't mean that you have to do so. There are people who share pics of their pregnancy, from the positive test, continued by ultrasound photos and news about the baby's gender, pics of their growing baby bump, followed by pics of the baby shower party up to those of their newborn baby.
We are able to follow many peoples pregnancies from (almost) the beginning to the end, but we've got no right for that.

Amal talking about her marriage to George Clooney, pictures of her pregnant, talk of giving birth, and/or her life as a mother to Ella and Alex brings their story to life.  A document is easy to fake; a pregnancy can't be faked. Only someone with a twisted heart and mind would walk around pretending to be pregnant.

Carol:  We are able to follow many peoples pregnancies from (almost) the beginning to the end, but we've got no right for that.

You're right, we don't have written in our Constitution the "right to know the private life of celebrities". However if you don't want your life to be of interest to the public, then DON'T live your life as a public figure.  As a celebrity, having people interested in your private life is a part of the journey. Surely, Amal knew getting pregnant and having George Clooney's children would be of interest to people across the globe. I'm sure when Amal is ready, she will share her children with people across the globe; Even the future King and Queen of England share their children lives with the rest of the globe.

by party animal - not! Sun 18 Feb 2018, 19:00

Ladybug, George and Amal Clooney are not public property no matter how much anyone would like them to be.
They do a job of work which involves the public.

But the public do not own them or have the right to know every last minutae of their lives.

Neither would they for one moment want to use their children as props.They are far too intelligent for that, thank God - and it's utterly refreshing

by ladybugcngc Sun 18 Feb 2018, 19:41

party animal - not! wrote:Ladybug, George and Amal Clooney are not public property no matter how much anyone would like them to be.
They do a job of work which involves the public.

But the public do not own them or have the right to know every last minutae of their lives.

Neither would they for one moment want to use their children as props.They are far too intelligent for that, thank God - and it's utterly refreshing

I have not said George and Amal Clooney are public property. Only pagan's try to make people property and believe they have the right to own them.

A Public figure is someone who lives their life in the eye of the public. If Amal did not tie the knot with George Clooney I would not know she existed and the birth of her children would be of NO interest to me. George being a Internationally known A-List Celebrity with links to Humanitarian causes across the globe, for you to think people across the globe are not interested in George Clooney's children is naïve to say the very least.

I don't think Amal Clooney sharing a picture of her twins would be using them as prop. I don't in any way, shape, form, or fashion think the future King and Queen of England use their children as props; I think it's absolutely wonderful to see a little glance into the life their children.

Other than twisted reality stars, I don't know anybody who would use props to represent children. Only people with twisted minds would use a prop to represent children.

by it's me Sun 18 Feb 2018, 20:26

I searched prop on my online vocabulary

But there are too many
And also different
Meanings

So
Which one I have to consider as right
In this case?

Thanks in advance

by Sponsored content