Posted on 03/21/2017 2:12:39 PM PDT by RummyChick
Angelina Jolie has been no stranger to scandal over the years, but the latest storm that’s brewing could be one of the most serious yet — if it proves to have any merit at all, that is. Mounh Sarath, an aid worker in Cambodia, is claiming that he listed himself as the father of Maddox Jolie-Pitt on the boy’s adoption papers to help speed up the process for the actress in 2003. “She had to change his name, so the only way was for me to do it. I said he’s my son,” he explained. Allegedly, Jolie was supposed to fix that detail later, but according to Sarath, she never did. Based on this, the 51-year-old is arguing that he actually still has power of attorney over the 15-year-old boy.
On Sunday, Sarath produced the document he’d filed with a court in Battambang, Cambodia, in August 2003, which seemed to confirm the court considered him the father, according to the Sun; however, his documentation does not seem to prove that either Jolie or her then-husband, Billy Bob Thornton (who originally adopted Maddox too), knew Sarath had done this. Neither has commented on the allegations.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Are you? Why so aggressively defensive?
AJ appears to be a man -- a man who is openly transgendering a young child.
Why so needlessly cruel?
AJ appears to be a man
That says more about you than her.
What satisfaction do you get out of saying such crazy things?
Please explain how it is "cruel" to question whether or not a celebrity LGBT activist with visible male characteristics is transgendered?
One would have to be stupid to think that and insensitive to insist on it.
If she was born biologically deformed in some way, it definitely is cruel to bring it up.
If you disagree with her on some issue, it doesn't justify personal abuse of someone who is primarily known as an entertainer, not a politician.
Absurd. "Entertainers" who serve as UN functionaries and get invited to the Vatican are in a league of their own. Again, please explain how questioning whether someone is transgendered constitutes "personal abuse". In light of the incessant rhetoric, one might presume transgendering is something to celebrate. Apparently some want to have it both ways. Hypocrisy abounds.
Attempts to justify dishonest rumors on ideological grounds don't fly and disgrace the causes the liars claim to support.
And you didn't just "question." In one of your responses, you said "AJ appears to be a man."
Fortunately most people aren't as spiteful as you are, so your asinine theory didn't make any headway.
Another day, another absurd scolding from “x”, replete with the usual Saul Alinsky tactics.
Irritating fans, shills and bots are bad PR for celebrities who position themselves as opinion leaders. One who continuously posts personal insults in defense of a celebrity whom no one really knows or cares about reeks of shill.
If you are not an AJ shill, you really ought to catch up on the widespread transgenderism currently being exposed throughout the entertainment, sports and media realms. It is not an isolated phenomenon. The true “fakes” are those who represent themselves falsely and even worse, pretend to be disinterested observers while publicly advocating for societal transformation.
Neither is this conversation. Good riddance, troll.
Sayonara, "x".
Regardless of whatever else Jolie may or may not be, I think she’s well established as a liberal Hollywood tumour. Seems rather odd that a long-time Freeper would play white knight for such a creature.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.