Ms. NineCent – The World’s First Nine Word Blogger and hottest Muslim Chick On Earth: Allah Hafiz Angie
Angie’s urge to dominate and to possess has backfired!
Ana Uhebbuki – Ms. NineCent
- 62 Comments
- Tags: Brangie
Pop Culture News and Views by Journalist Ian Halperin
Ian on Twitter
IUCTV News
The Replay of "Talk Royalty with His Highness" with Special Guest Dawn Olsen is available at:
Click Here to get Alerted by Email for the Next IUCTV Show
IUCTV Previous Shows
- IUC Holiday Chat December 29, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 10/06/09 05:31PM October 6, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 06/09/09 07:12PM June 9, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 06/09/09 06:31PM June 9, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 06/09/09 06:30PM June 9, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 06/09/09 06:15PM June 9, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness 06/09/09 06:13PM June 9, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness May 13, 2009
- Untitled May 13, 2009
- Talk Royalty with His Highness March 5, 2009
Recent Comments
What Ian is Talking About
A-Rod
Alex Rodriguez
American Idol
Angelina Jolie
Barack Obama
Bill Clinton
Brad Pitt
Brangelina
Brangie
Britney Spears
Charlie Sheen
Cirque du Soleil
Gay
George Clooney
Guy laliberte
His Highness Hollywood
Hollywood
hollywood split
Ian Halperin
Jake Gyllenhaal
Jen Aniston
jennifer aniston
Jesse James
John McCain
John Travolta
Justin Timberlake
Lindsay Lohan
Madonna
Michael Jackson
NY Yankees
Oprah
Oprah Winfrey
Paris Hilton
Paula Abdul
Perez Hilton
Prince harry
Rizia Moreira
Sandra Bullock
Sarah Palin
Shania Twain
The Governator
Tiger Woods
Tom Cruise
Toothy Tile
U.S. Election
Backfire how? Lose her children? BF? Will someone credible break lose and squeal about her nasty habits?
ReplyHm, I don’t get this one either. By “dominate and possess” I assume we’re referring to Brad and the kids. Do you mean that her attempt to go for full custody has backfired on her and she has lost to Brad? I’m assuming this means something along those lines. Although I would love it to be about her control over the media – that her desire to dominate and possess all those mags has backfired on her, she’s pissed them off and now they’re ready to take her down. That’s what I’d like it to be about. Lol.
ReplyMe. I like it to be about custody first. Then the media. Then Brad.
Actually all three would be nice.
Reply@ p – I think your luck is in, I’m pretty sure that’s what it means!
ReplyI think that since it was an all or nothing scenario she was after, she just lost out. Control freak just lost control.
Thanks habipti
Reply@ Canuck – well I will have a hearty drink to that! I hope you will all join me!
ReplyGood!
ReplyHere here!!!!!!
Reply@Keane:
Cat.
Swallowed.
Canary.
Talk.
Reply@ HH – so are we correct? And can you (or Ms Nine Cent!) divulge whether Brad got full custody of all of them, full of the bios, or half of them all? Still so many details to fill in….
ReplyAngelina Jolie is the happiest she has ever been thanks to her loving relationship with Brad Pitt and their 6 children. The actress also admits she loves the way her life has changed since becoming a mother. Angelina – whose mother Marcheline Bertrand passed away in 2007 – said:
“I’m much happier and more fulfilled than I thought I would ever be, especially when I was going through a lot of grief when I was younger. I hope it lasts.
“I think I’m becoming more like my mother and looking more like her too as I get older. I’m also more gentle and nurturing since becoming a mother.”
Angelina told Britain’s Closer magazine that while she doesn’t have a hard time juggling work with family, but she has to help out Brad in that department.
“I’m very organized. I don’t get stressed and I take everything in my stride. I’ve had to help Brad a bit with that part of our life!
The biggest problem is just lack of sleep. But all parents face that – you’re just grateful when the kids fall asleep and you can collapse on the couch together.”
Angelina also admits that work is no longer her number one priority.
“I’m not as ambitious as I used to be – my family is my priority. When we get film offer, we ask ourselves, ‘Will it be good for the family?’ “At some point I want to relax, look after my family and do more humanitarian work.”
I just love her passion for helping others.
Reply@Keane:
@cuze:
@HisHighness:
Champagne for everyone, except the kids who get sparkling apple juice. And Angie, who gets bitter tears probably.
Reply@ JULIA – that’s hilarious, do you honestly believe all that? Have you been reading this site at all? The woman is clearly addicted to drugs and has collapsed many times and lost a ridiculous amount of weight due to it. It sounds very much like she has just lost custody of her children. She asked to work for the UN because she thought it would be good for her image and what she does is like a drop in the ocean compared to the work most humanitarian workers do, and they don’t get to stay in 5 star hotels then hotfoot it back to their 60 million dollar mansions either. I feel it is an apposite time to repost a post written by Cate on a thread from a while back, to follow…. Oh and giving up work for her family, hilarious, what is she up to right now?
Reply@JULIA:
ReplyAnd how do you interpret this?
Keane do have any further inside scoop on this story, just from the certainty and satisfaction of your post it sounded like it…but maybe holding something back?
Reply@ The Amazing Keane – Looks like there’s a huge battle going on for the kids. Angie is being stubborn, she want to be the sole decision maker.
ReplyI don’t believe this article at that I don’t believe much I read nowadays. I just enjoy reading all your comments on this board I don’t really comment much. At the end of the day if these two are together or not it really won’t make much of a difference to me. I do hope that if AJ does have a drug problem she gets some help whether her or BP are together I don’t care I just wish the best for the kids.
Replyhttp://www.thinkfashion.com/blogs/stylosity_hollywood_hookup/archive/2009/04/07/brad-pitt-and-angelina-jolie-breakup-brad-and-jennifer-aniston-reunite.aspx
That bitch is going to try and pin this on Aniston AGAIN.
@HisHighness:
ReplyI’m glad to hear that Brad isn’t backing down. I’m sorry to hear that it isn’t decided.
@ HisHighness If that’s true hope with all my heart that it has indeed backfired.
Reply@ p – if only I did have some inside info on that custody battle, if it were going on in the UK I might have done. No that was just my interpretation of the “nine cents”, sounds to me like her going for broke is backfiring and now there’s an all out war. Had she gone for shared as Brad wanted, maybe it would have been better for her. But try to “dominate and possess” all and you might end up with egg on your face. Let’s hope she does!
@ HH – do you know what’s happening with the adopted ones? We’ve been debating for ages whether he legally adopted them or not and if not, whether he’ll have any right to them. Then there was the whole were they, weren’t they married debate, it sounds like they’re not right otherwise the custody battle would be part of a divorce case right, and you haven’t mentioned that yet.
@ everyone – a toast – to the safe, happy and secure future of those children, ideally as far away from their mother as humanly possible!
Reply@The Amazing Keane – My sources tell me that they’re common law married – were supposed to have a wedding even though they said they wouldn’t get married till gay marriage bill was passed. It was BS because they had a date and called it off.
Reply@HisHighness:
ReplyCommon law married under which jurisdiction? California, or did they sign a “PAC” or “concubinage” in France over the summer?
Ms. Nine Cents, can you give us a clue as to what you mean by “hafiz” in the post title? I’m pretty sure that Angie hasn’t memorized that Quran…
ReplyIs she wants sole decisions that is legal custody, so Brad would not have a say where she takes them to live which is probably the biggest issue to him. I doubt he cares what religion she teaches them, the healthcare he probably trust she would do the right thing. He will never have a say though ever on how they are raised, not Christmas trees, not trick or treat, if she wants to take them all to Cambodia, oh well.
I don’t see how he could have won anything at this point, if they are not agreeing, this will be forced to court.
Anyone see that Obama appointed Kal Penn -
WASHINGTON – The White House has hired actor Kal Penn as a liaison between President Barack Obama’s administration and Asian constituents.
White House spokesman Shin Inouye said Tuesday that the actor who had a recurring role on Fox’s TV show “House” and has starred in several movies would join the staff as an associate director in the Office of Public Liaison. His role will be to connect Obama with the Asian-American and Pacific Islander communities, as well as arts groups.
Penn starred as Kumar in the movie, “Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay.” His “House” character committed suicide in Monday’s episode.
Penn backed Obama during the campaign. The White House says a start date for Penn hasn’t been set.
The hire was first reported by Entertainment Weekly.
You never know, Brad may not be far behind. lol
Reply@Canuck:
ReplyIn the US I thought a couple was common law after living together for 7 years.
This site says it’s not recognized in California: http://www.cadivorceonline.com/calpages/Alimony/commonlawmarriage.asp
Also from there: “Contrary to popular belief, even if two people live together for a certain number of years, if they don’t intend to be married and present themselves to others as a married couple, there is no common law marriage. More particularly, a common law marriage can occur only when:
* a heterosexual couple lives together in a state that recognizes common law marriages
* for a significant period of time (not defined in any state)
* holding themselves out as a married couple — typically this means using the same last name, referring to the other as “my husband” or “my wife” and filing a joint tax return, and
* intending to be married.
Unless all four are true, there is no common law marriage. When a common law marriage exists, the couple must go through a formal divorce to end the relationship.
Also:
Common law marriage is recognized only in the following states:
* Alabama
* Colorado
* District of Columbia
* Iowa
* Kansas
* Montana
* New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only)
* Oklahoma
* Pennsylvania
* Rhode Island
* South Carolina
* Utah
Which is why I asked about France, they have different ways to acknowledge a relationship that has nothing to do with how long you’ve been together.
Reply@ HH – if they have a common-law marriage, what would be the implications for custody of the adopted kids for Brad? Does that give him as much of a right to them as she has, or at least some right? Or did he adopt them all in the first place anyway? We’re all concerned about the kids here!
@ JULIA – why on earth did you just post that article on two different threads?! What point are you trying to make?
ReplyThanks for clearing up the marriage bit, Ian. Hopefully this will turn out well for the children so that they can, for the first time in their lives, have stability and a chance at a somewhat normal life.
@Canuck:
ReplyMay our cuppeth runneth overreth..lol.. oh shucks, just pass the bottle.
@cuze:
Replylol
This website is a tease!!! I have wanted that skank to get what’s coming to her for YEARS. I only hope this reporting is accurate, brad gets the kids, and Jen finds a life with someone else.
Reply@ jude – I’m not sure he will get full custody unless he goes for the jugular re: her rumoured drug use. I’mn not sure he would want full custody though, and I doubt she would either. I think they both just want absolute control over them, and that the other doesn’t have any. Its sad. God help those children.
ReplyTHE MYTH: There is a common misperception that if you live together for a certain length of time (seven years is what many people believe), you are common-law married. This is not true anywhere in the United States.
STATES THAT RECOGNIZE COMMON LAW MARRIAGE:
Only a few states recognize common law marriages:
Alabama
Colorado
Georgia (if created before 1/1/97)
Idaho (if created before 1/1/96)
Iowa
Kansas
Montana
New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only)
Ohio (if created before 10/10/91)
Oklahoma (possibly only if created before 11/1/98. Oklahoma’s laws and court decisions may be in conflict about whether common law marriages formed in that state after 11/1/98 will be recognized.)
Pennsylvania (if created before 1/1/05)
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Utah
Washington, D.C.
IF YOU LIVE IN A STATE THAT DOES RECOGNIZE COMMON LAW MARRIAGE: If you live in one of the above states and you “hold yourself out to be married” (by telling the community you are married, calling each other husband and wife, using the same last name, filing joint income tax returns, etc.), you can have a common law marriage (for more information on the specific requirements of each state, see next page). Common law marriage makes you a legally married couple in every way, even though you never obtained a marriage license. If you choose to end your relationship, you must get a divorce, even though you never had a wedding. Legally, common law married couples must play by all the same rules as “regular” married couples. If you live in one of the common law states and don’t want your relationship to become a common law marriage, you must be clear that it is your intention not to marry. The attorneys who wrote Living Together (additional information below) recommend an agreement in writing that both partners sign and date: “Jane Smith and John Doe agree as follows: That they’ve been and plan to continue living together as two free, independent beings and that neither has ever intended to enter into any form of marriage, common law or otherwise.”
IF YOU LIVE IN A STATE THAT DOES NOT RECOGNIZE COMMON LAW MARRIAGE, there is no way to form a common law marriage, no matter how long you live with your partner. There is one catch: if you spend time in a state that does recognize common law marriage, “hold yourself out as married,” and then return or move to a state that doesn’t recognize it, you are still married (since states all recognize marriages that occurred in other states). However, this is murky legal territory and we don’t recommend experimenting with it!
STATE-BY-STATE REQUIREMENTS TO FORM A COMMON LAW MARRIAGE:
http://www.unmarried.org/common-law-marriage-fact-sheet.html
Reply@Keane:
ReplyNah it’s sounds like where we were before. She wants full, in retaliation, maybe he’s asking for the same, but yeah unless he goes for the jugular…and around we go.
Is that why they went to so much trouble to change the names of the children? Does this somehow factor into the common law marriage? Also, the fact that they have a foundation together, etc. Has anyone thought about the money? What will happen to their foundation and all the money that they got for the photos of the babies? There is no proof that they have actually donated that to charity. IMO, it should go to the children.
Reply@canuck allah hafiz in english would be god bless you or god help you. I’m not fluent in arabic by any means so had to ask my husband. He said there’s no direct translation but that would be the closest.
Reply@mandy:
ReplyI agree, it should go to the children. I would think that the statement about “not getting married until gay marriage is recognized” would qualify as clearly defining their status.
@HisHighness:
Ian is this the same committment ceremony that has been so widely discussed? We had a in depth discussion on here the other day about this after a poster claimed they were married only to find out that poster really had no idea and went to another site and claimed to need proof and asked people if any of them knew if Brad and Angelina were married.
They have lived in so many different places and none long enough to be common law or it seems, is the custody being based in California ?
Do you know if Brad has adopted Maddox , Pax, and Zahara? that seems to be the biggest question right now?
Reply@Canuck:
ReplyThat’s true, but they have backtracked on that a bit since then. I remember an interview with Angelina where she said something like, ” I think what Brad meant was that it is unfair that gay people can’t get married, he wasn’t talking about us,” or something along those lines. Maybe the common law marriage thing is the reason for that. Whatever is going on, this will be the battle of the century. They both have a team of lawyers behind them. It should get interesting for sure.
@Mememe:
ReplyAha. I don’t think I ran into that in Egypt, but then I don’t speak it fluently either. At one time enough to get by, but that’s gone now.
@The Great Kate – my sources says Angie is trying to prove the adoption papers are invalid.
Reply@Canuck:
Angelina came out in a interview a few months after Brad made that statement and said, “he did not really mean we would wait until everyone who was gay could get married, we were not even talking about getting married, it was just sort of like, wouldn’t it be nice if everyone could get married” totally put it to rest, the quote is out there somewhere, but everyone in the media ingored that, and kept citing that was the reason they did not get married, then she and both began using, “we do not need a piece of paper” then it was “if the kids want us to we will” ..lol
I would bet he wised up around the time he met the pitbull. jmo
Reply@HisHighness:
OMG, you mean for him, IAN that is a bomb shell, tell us more…you mean she is saying the adoption papers for him adopting the kids are invalid, eww , lordy is there any doubt that she will not turn these kids against her.
Can I come work for you ? LOL j/k
Reply@Kate:
ReplyI meant she will turn the kids against Brad, just like her mama did her..against Jon
@Kate:
ReplyYeah the “pit” …he’d sure have one hell of a time trying to dance around the question of why he agreed to Pax and the twins after that mind-blower. I wonder why the adoption papers would be invalid.
@HisHighness:
She’s given up on the biological kids then?
@Kate:
ReplyI wonder if she manages to prove that, if Brad couldn’t go further and prove that HER adoptions were illegal. Maddox was adopted through someone who later was indicted, more or less because she was running a fraudulent operation that was passing bought babies off as orphans, and it’s quite likely he was bought off of his impoverished mother. Zahara’s mother never signed the adoption papers, and her grandmother who signed is illiterate. Pax is about the only one who seems to have been adopted in a more or less regular manner.
@Kate:
ReplyYeah but was her mom indulging in strippers and other such dalliances? Sometimes despite best efforts, history can only repeat itself so much.
@p:
Olay where are the legal minds, what would make adoption papers illegal, remember he would have adopted as a new person, not as a step parent? He has to start the process over, and she had to give signed permission saying he could adopt her children..and it had to happen in California. That is where the petition to adopt was filed.
This reminds me of that rock star,was it Mick Jagger that tried to say he was never legally married to Jerry Hall after years and years and kids?
Reply@Kate:
Maybe something like the absence of a valid 3rd party witness or something? A missed filing date?
I wonder what law firms are involved.
Reply@p:
ReplyWhat about the fact that the adoption laws changed when the same sex marraige passed, many got married, that was around the time Pitt would have filed , then it got overturned, would that affect how the adoption went, because prior to those changes I do not think he could adopt the same way he would have under those laws. So if that was thrown out with the same sex marriage, does that make the adoptions null and void? Just thinking here-he did donate 100 k
Did you guys see SR’s new post?
ReplyIrregardless of whether the adoption papers were valid or not I would assume the judge could certainly deem BP as the father since he is the only father they have known (might be different for Maddox) and then advise Pitt to refile for custody in the meantime. What’s almost certain though, is that AJ is not going to get custody regardless…at least if all that has been alleged here on this forum is proven in court.
Reply@cuze:
ReplyYes, but Angelina is the custodial parent, Brad can not adopt any of those adotped children without her signature. So even if she loses custody they could go to her family temporary until she gets her act together and then she can get them back. If she is fighting the legality of this now she is not going to turn around and sign off on anything he refiles. It is like someone meeting a widow with small kids and they decide they want to adopt them, it is up to her.She has to allow it, now if they are married it just becomes a step parent adoption and it is relatively easy, but if not, he has to apply to adopt those kids that belong to her like anyone else would, takes longer, home studies etc. When same sex marriage passed I believe it got eassier, but then once that was thrown out maybe that is what the issue is. NY has a clause he can take custody even if he is not the adoptive father, but it is very rare. Not sure about California law, if that is where she will file. Jurisidiction is a key issue.
Irregardless is not a word.
Reply@ Chaka – I’m sure Cuze knows that, I expect she didn’t pause to edit, but I’ve no doubt she’s grateful to you for pointing that out. Got anything better to contribute to the discussion?
Reply@Chaka:
So what.
Replyhttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation:
\ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
Function:
adverb
Etymology:
probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date:
circa 1912
nonstandard : regardless
Replyusage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
@Chaka:
ReplyPurdon my edumcation.. will work to git it up to purr.
@Keane:
Hey Keane, I found this one the funniest – “I’m not as ambitious as I used to be – my family is my priority. When we get film offer, we ask ourselves, ‘Will it be good for the family?’ “At some point I want to relax, look after my family and do more humanitarian work.”
I mean, just like you said, what is she doing right now?…and nonstop, I may add – working!! Movie after movie. Serious joke here. “I’m not as ambitious as I used to be” hahahahahahahahaha lmao hahahahahaha…lol….
Reply@Kate:
ReplyI would also think the day to day influence she has on them would be important and troubling to him…it is to me anyway! She is scary…imo.
@cuze:
Reply“May our cuppeth runneth overreth..lol.. oh shucks, just pass the bottle.”…lol!
@Kate:
lol…the pitt-bull would be a big slap in the face, huh? That quote sure is weaslely (word? : )…oh we just meant wouldn’t it be nice if everyone could get married…..right.
@p:
ReplyMaybe she’s just hoping she can invalidate them somehow…but if they are legal, fat chance, I would think.
I do not think they are a happy content couple. They need to be honest with each other for the sake of their children.@JULIA:
Reply