Celebrities control government?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by nbs2, May 28, 2006.

  1. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #1
    I happened upon this article, only interesting because of the title.

    Is anybody else disturbed that a country would
    "celebrities"?
     
  2. Doctor Q Administrator

    Doctor Q

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #2
    The reason is clear:
     
  3. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #3
    Yep, but I also like this quote and wish the rest of the world was more like it:

     
  4. nbs2 thread starter macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #4
    Yeah, I understand that they need a boost in their economy, but I really wonder how much tourism increasing is going to benefit the poorest, who are often in rural areas.

    More than that, I could understand the government prohibiting people from going less than X distance from the compound, but the entire country and the airspace? That is a lot of control - I don't think Namibia is that big a place, but it isn't the Vatican. I don't know, perhaps the couple is funding all of this extra security. I guess after all years of talking about celebrities making enough to buy countries, someone did it...
     
  5. Les Kern macrumors 68040

    Les Kern

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    #5
    Name one celebrity that would be worse than our current leader.
    Sounds fine to me.
     
  6. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #6
    About all of them! ;)
     
  7. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #7
    I guess I can applaud the ends without necessarily approving of the means. Celebrities being given that kind of power is more than a little ridiculous.

    OTOH, now that Namibia has established a precedent, this may not be the last time we'll hear of something like this.
     
  8. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #8
    To be fair, based on a news report on Namibia's constitution, they have a greater respect over personal privacy than many western nations.

    As a street photographer, I think I would have a hard time in Namibia.

    BTW - I love your new aviator. I would love one as a pin.
     
  9. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #9
    I like how they protected Jolie. It doesn't even have to be about tourism. You can't have 791 reporters and photographers following around a pregnant woman, even if she's a celebrity. Free speech and the ability for a reporter to do their job is fine, but sometimes it's too extreme. All this freedom doesn't give you the "right" to be so inconsiderate.
     
  10. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #10
    Maybe one of the few times I'll agree with you. :)

    Reminds me of story of Bush Sr., taking a walk to the Vietnam Memorial on Veterans Day after he lost the election. The press was up in arms that they were not notified, and tagged along. Bush Sr. commented later that he could not endure the "death watch" that the press had.
     
  11. nbs2 thread starter macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #11
    I'm fine with protecting an expectant mother. What I'm not fine with is relinquishing entry control/airspace to a private citizen, especially one from another country. Also disturbing was the implication that the ban was nationwide. Like I said before, maybe if Namibia was the size of the Vatican, but not when it is half the size of Alaska...
     
  12. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #12
    Arnold.
     
  13. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #13
    It's their airspace, and quite frankly, it's their visa process. They can choose to let in anyone they want. If they want to reject you, even if you can't find a reason why they would, they still can.

    These people are entering the country to follow and harrass someone. I'll let their government's decision slide. ;)

    Their media, on the other hand, shouldn't be arrested if all they're doing is their job --- trying to get the story, or a photo. THAT would be wrong.
     
  14. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #14
    A bit more info from the CIA factbook here. It's pretty big but nobody lives there. Most of it is either desert or restricted diamond mining areas.

     
  15. Black&Tan macrumors 6502a

    Black&Tan

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    #15
    Its pretty sad that anyone has to travel to a foreign country, practically in the middle of nowhere, just to avoid the press and bring a new life into the world.

    So they had a baby, who cares! Everybody does it, why does it matter if a celebrity has one? How does it change your life if Angelina has a baby? It's not yours, it's not mine. Is the middle-aged, overweight housewife from middle America somehow enlightened by this event? Has her life changed for the better? I think not.
     
  16. nbs2 thread starter macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #16
    Yeahbut. If the government wants to make decisions, fine. But, when you exclude a specific group of people because two "celebrities" say so (and kick out those that are already there), aren't you really pushing the envelope? I mean, if I say I don't want foreign journalists in the US and the government complies because I say so....don't the terrorists win? :p
     
  17. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #17
    Sadly, some of them probably think they are.

    I've never understood why some people get so wrapped up in the affairs of other people whom they don't even know. Then again, I have my own life and rather enjoy it so I don't need to live vicariously through others.
     
  18. clayj macrumors 604

    clayj

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    visiting from downstream
    #18
    What, this Arnold?:

    [​IMG]

    I'm pretty sure the Jolie-Pitts (horrible name) went there precisely because there is NOTHING to do in Namibia and therefore no reason for the press to be there EXCEPT to hassle them... and I'm sure money changed hands to ensure it stayed that way.

    Anyway, whatever. It's Namibia.
     
  19. Mr. Durden macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #19
    I dont mind whats happening at all, but I would love to see exactly how much money is changing hands. Its got to be millions. This may be the most expensive birth ever. And I'm not really all that interested in their personal life aside from the fact that I like them both as actors (and she is un-friggin-believably hot).:D
     
  20. Frozone macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2002
    Location:
    Atlanta, Georgia
    #20
    Angelina isn't a normal hot. She's more of a goddess type hot. But i do agree, it would be interesting to see the money breakdown. Personally, I can't blame Nambia. Dirt poor country and someone wants to pay you to let them have a peaceful birth. Heck yeah!
     
  21. dornoforpyros macrumors 68040

    dornoforpyros

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    #21
    normally I'd be really bothered by the thought of a government bending over backwards to please a celebrity, but at the same time I think it's about time some one stuck it to the media/paparazzi.
    Having a child is a very intimate and private moment for every family, and just because your a celebrity does not mean you are not entitled to this privacy. So although it might seem like a lot for the government to be going out of it's way for just one couple, I still think in this case, it was in good taste.
     
  22. Mr. Durden macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #22
    They may have just tripled Namibia's GNP. That country is so poor and hungry I say more power to them if it helps them out a bit. Maybe they can cater to more celebrities having babies and really put some food on the table.;)

    And yes, Jolie isnt like a regular person kind of hot. More like super natural, please let me worship you hot. (takes a deep sigh)
     
  23. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #23
    She does absolutely nothing for me.
     
  24. Mr. Durden macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #24

    Nothing for you? She cooks me breakfast. Great scrambled eggs. Yum.
     
  25. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #25
    Obviously I am missing something from your comments. Help me out here. What do you mean?

    As far a Jolie, nothing about her interests me.
     

Share This Page