Angelina Jolie addresses UN Security Council about the Syrian refugee crisis

136140PCN_Angelina14

On Friday, Angelina Jolie appeared before the United Nations Security Council in her capacity as Special Envoy of the High Commission on Refugees. She ended up scolding the Security Council for their utter inaction on Syria, and their refusal to acknowledge or do anything for the millions of Syrian refugees fleeing their country. The numbers are min-boggling: the UN estimates that 3.8 million refugees have left Syria and more than 7 million Syrians have been displaced in the past four years. She didn’t call out specific countries – namely, Russia – but did note that some members of the Security Council refused to impose sanctions and embargos on Syria, moves that could possibly halt at least some of the Syrian diaspora. She also slams the “lack of political will” to deal with the crisis. Here’s part of her testimony:

You can read the full transcript of her Security Council remarks here. This is what Angelina Jolie looks like when she’s pissed off and frustrated. And she’s right to be pissed off and frustrated – this is one of the largest humanitarian crises of the past 50 years and no one is really doing anything about it.

After her appearance at the UN, Jolie spoke at the Women of the World Summit, speaking about the sexual violence facing so many female refugees in Iraq and Syria. She said: “Who among us would have thought we would see, in Iraq and Syria, images of women in cages, sold into sex slavery? Crimes against women are still treated as secondary issues.” She was the closing speaker – here is her speech:

PS… I know this is superficial, but I love her brooch.

136140PCN_Angelina07

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News, Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

127 Responses to “Angelina Jolie addresses UN Security Council about the Syrian refugee crisis”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jen43 says:

    She is amazing. I rarely say this, but God bless her. She does great things with her life.

    • Paris says:

      Jen43: I totally agree. I used to think she was a weirdo, back in the day when she did “Gia” and wore vials of blood, but I’ve come to have nothing but complete admiration and respect for her. She is incredible. I couldn’t hold a candle to her.

      • Gina says:

        She is STILL a weirdo- who goes to the UN and gives a speech with their nipples on full display?? Exhibitionist !

      • Tracy says:

        So tell us, Gina. What constructive thing have you and your nipples done to better the world today?

      • Lady D says:

        Good to see you have your priorities right, Gina. /s

      • Kitten says:

        All you got out of this post is nipples, Gina?
        I think you might be the one with the problem.

      • Paris says:

        She’s adopted 3 children, one of whom was at death’s door; she’s bringing attention to the plight of the Syrian people and the refugees, and you’re upset that her nipple is showing through her blouse?! Give me a huge break.

      • sherlockapple says:

        First of all, there’s nothing wrong with being a “weirdo”. The term is highly subjective and could be taken as a massive compliment. My guess is that she would agree with my statement. So that’s hardly an insult. It’s a small part of what got her where she is today.

        Second of all, gee, yeh…her nipples showed. Wow. They weren’t exposed, they just popped up through her clothing. She should be able to control them better! That puts her right up there with the Kartrashians. Next thing you know, she’ll be getting butt implants, wearing neon yellow to a memorial, wearing see through crotch pants and forgetting her kids in hotel rooms.

        Love Angie. I think she’s amazing. She’s not perfect, none of us are, but she is leaving her mark in this world as someone with some power who truly tried to help others. Bravo.

      • FLORC says:

        Of course nipples. There’s nothing else that could be attacked. That nipples is what was chosen to validate an attack says so much.

      • mytbean says:

        I’d vote for her if she ran for president right now – AND her nipples because whether or not their subtle display was intentional, having them present in a room full of old randy men may have wielded more influence than her words could with a lot of them.

    • Tracy says:

      I’m right there with you, Jen. You go, Angie.

      • Camille (The Original) says:

        +10000. She is just awesome. Truly.

      • Malak says:

        Me too! Respect for Angelina Jolie. She doesn’t have to do this, but she has been with the UNHCR for more than a decade.

    • Greata says:

      Haters gonna hate, but nothing can diminish the light of a woman working to better the world. Go Angie!

    • MrsBPitt says:

      wow…and I thought I couldn’t admire and respect her anymore than I already did! She is amazing!

  2. qwerty says:

    Also worth mentioning, from the daily mail:
    “When asked about Jolie’s briefing on Friday, Syria’s U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari (pictured left) responded: ‘She is beautiful’ ”

    • mememe says:

      You’re fvking kidding me. That’s ridiculous and sad.

      • Egghead says:

        I didn’t think he meant it in a superficial way, talking about her physical beauty. I thought he meant it as in “she’s a beautiful person on the inside,” for what she’s doing for the people of Syria. I could be wrong, that’s just how I interpreted it.

        Anyways, I’m not an Angelina fan, but I think this and all the work she does on behalf of the worlds underprivileged is amazing.

    • M.A.F. says:

      I was coming here to say that. I was watching the Nightly News last night and they mentioned that response. Lame.

    • Katie says:

      I heard that comment and said to my husband “she’s up there pouring her heart out trying to get help for people in crisis and all they can say is ‘she’s beautiful'”
      I don’t usually believe celebrities and their causes because they so rarely put their money where their mouth is, but Angelina is the exception. I’ve never really been a fan of her acting but I am becoming a big fan of her as a person. She’s remarkable and deserves respect.

    • mytbean says:

      yeah… he’s probably intensely intimidated and has to objectify her in order to survive her presence. Whatever – he can think with his genitals as long as his actions benefit her priorities.

  3. Greek chic says:

    There’s a huge problem with refugees and immigrants and the security council or the European governments do nothing. Here there are shipwrecks almost everyday. The slave traders take all their money, the promise them to ship them to Greece or Italy and then they sink the ship. Its terrible. Innocent people die and no one cares.
    In only one week, over 800refugges died in Lampedusa in the Mediterranean sea and 4(of 150) in Rhodes.

    • qwerty says:

      Some of these people went on record saying they paid 10 thousand dollars for the “cruise”. You could EASILY but an airplane ticket for that much, so why don’t they? Because they know they don’t qualify for a refugee status is what I think.

      • Greek Chic says:

        qwerty i have heard that they don’t give the money themselves. They usually have relatives or friends that live and work in a european country and they are the ones who pay for the cruise. They know that they may die or the ship will shink but that doesn’t stop them.
        I know a man from Syria that paid about 3000€ for his wife to come here. She arrived illegally in Greece,stayed for a few months and now she lives in a refugee shelter in Sweden.

      • qwerty says:

        Exactly… they are all headed for Sweden, or Germany, or the already overcrowded UK (I’m not from any of these countries btw). If you’re really migrating due to war or other danger that would give you a refugee status, you go to the first SAFE place that will have you, and there are many more options other than crossing the Med. Why do they risk their lives to go to Europe? And why, after reaching Italy or Greece or Spain they continue they journey further up north? Because they’re not after safety, they just want to go to some of the richest coutries in the world (illegaly) where they will earn the most money or get the most benefits. Which makes them economic immigrants and not refugees, and I don’t see why EU should just take them and all their family and neighbours who will undoubtedly follow once they see it worked.

      • Greek Chic says:

        Of course they don’t want to stay here. They come here in order to go to Northern Europe. The problem is that nowadays even for rich European countries as Sweden is difficult to take care of them.

        Some of them are refugees, others immigrants. Every situation is different. But you right, many of them take advantage of the refugee status and use it.

      • A.Key says:

        @qwerty

        “If you’re really migrating due to war or other danger that would give you a refugee status, you go to the first SAFE place that will have you, and there are many more options other than crossing the Med.”

        Oh really? Why don’t you pop open a map for a moment and take a look at the geographic options for safety that Syrians, Palestinians, and Libyans have. Please tell me what safe normal country is closer to them other than Greece, Italy and Malta.
        Don’t get me started on Turkey and the way that country treats ethnic and other minorities, or Erdogan’s comments on women.

        “Why do they risk their lives to go to Europe? And why, after reaching Italy or Greece or Spain they continue they journey further up north?”
        Because in 99% of cases they cannot get a job in Italy or Greece or Spain. I’m sure by now you know of the dire economic situation in these countries and how a large portion of the population is unemployed. These immigrants arrive with nothing, no money, no shelter, no family, no support, no friends. How long do you think they can last unemployed and alone on the streets? Of course they go to other places desperately seeking work in order to stay alive and feed themselves! Who wouldn’t?

        This lack of empathy by the EU seriously disgusts me.

        How many Europeans fled Europe for the US during and after WWII? What would have happened if the US decided to let them die or drown in front of the NY harbor, or if it sent them all back to their Nazi or Soviet occupied country?

        Seriously people, have a heart for human suffering.

      • Malak says:

        Maybe those with the money to buy plane tickets don’t have passports.

      • Emma33 says:

        There are two reasons why many asylum seeker can’t just hop on a plane to Europe, and they don’t have anything do to with money.

        Firstly, if you come from a “refugee-producing country”, it is usually VERY difficult to get a visa to a developed country.

        Secondly, if you are a genuine refugee you will be facing persecution, usually from your own government. This means that getting a passport, a visa, and going through immigration in your home country would be impossible…because your government would never let you do it.

        Approximately 90% of asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by plane are never given asylum. Approximately 95% of asylum seekers who arrive by boat ARE given asylum. This is because of the reasons outlined above…if your government gives you a passport and waves goodbye to you at the airport then it is very unlikely that you are facing a genuine threat of persecution!

      • mango says:

        @qwerty
        ” Yeah we colonized your country and forced our way in, but nah we aren’t accepting immigrants at this time”. I don’t recall Europeans having visas when they were pillaging our lands.
        Try again

    • Tapioca says:

      In all seriousness, how many refugees do you think Europe can hold?

      Why aren’t you asking the Arabic and African nations to sort out the mess, when it’s only they that can deal with the problems of huge financial inequalities and religious intolerance that create vast quantities of refugees and economic migrants in the first place?

      • DariaH. says:

        You mean she should ask those Arabic and African countries that were European colonies for years and years? Those countries that Europeans pushed their languages and religions on,for their own gain , and caused political mess and changes in borders and supply money and weapons for sides they like in these conflicts?

      • Greek Chic says:

        At this time Europe has more refugees that it can hold. The number of people that arrive everyday is huge. The thing is that most of them come from war zones, and this is one reason for the growing wave of refugees.

        Southern Europe is the most accessible and Italy,Greece and Malta are the countries that are at the forefront of the problem as the immigrants are shipped here in order to travel to Northern Europe. Apart from that, there’s the Dublin Regulation, according to which the Member State through which an asylum seeker first enters the EU is responsible for the care of the refugee who must be returned to the “Member State of Origin” if caught in another country. If a refugee is caught in Turkey for example they send him back to Greece or Italy and he’s stuck here.
        Truth is for years the European countries thought that if they would just close their eyes, the problem would be solved in a magic way. I also think that the US wasn’t aware of this problem until the recent tragedy in the Mediterrean sea, we deal with this quite often. Of course measures should be taken. There should be efforts to resolve the conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, processing of asylum applications, exchange of information between the european organisations on identifying the slave traders, creation of a new program for ther rapid return of illegal immigrants in their countries … To be honest i am not very optimistic about it (do you know how much money the slaver traders gain or the people who use the immigrants for illigal work?) but we’ll see.

        @DariaH. we may have other problems at this point but Greece never pushed a language or a religion to another country, nor caused ever political mess for money and weapons, so i don’t have to ask them the things that you say. Maybe if we sold weapons we wouldn’t be in i crisis these days. The irony.

        Apart from that, i don’t know where are you from but i hope you know that the US are is not a saint either. All countries have done horrible things in the past and they still do.

      • Sixer says:

        Tunisia already has 1.8m Libyan refugees. That’s 20% of Tunisia’s population.

        The number of MENA refugees sweeping to and from other conflict-ridden MENA countries dwarfs even those waiting in Libya to get on the trafficker boats. They number in the tens of millions. The countries in the region are the ones with most refugees – for example, we could argue that Syria’s current destablisation owes a lot to the several million Iraqis who ran away there during the chaos and violence post Western invasion.

        Not even the whole of Europe could share out the number of people from the MENA countries who are in Libya, or trying to get to Libya, trying to get on the trafficker boats.

        The UN agencies can’t go in to Syria or Libya to set up temporary camps because they can’t operate safely in war zones.

        The whole thing is a horrible, overwhelming, human tragedy. And one in which “our” hands are as dirty as anybody else’s.

      • DariaH. says:

        Greek Chick, I am not from US, and I think US is as far from any kind of saint as it could be. I know that this situation is horrible and blame goes around, and, of course, people think that different sides should take care of this problem. As I said in the post below, Jolie is not there to solve the political problem , so I think it’s pointless to say: she should have call out this country or that country. She is an advocate for refugees and she is pointing out that politicians should go and see them, talk to them and get to the table asap. Because they are not doing even this.

      • Hahahaha says:

        Wow, that is a really tone deaf response to a crisis. The ‘Arabic and African countries’ didn’t create these conflicts on their own. These are global problems . The wealthiest nations USA Germany Sweden Japan China are all involved and protecting their interests, and Africans and Syrians are paying with their lives.

        But don’t worry about that, keep blaming the victims and see where that gets Europe.

      • Greek Chic says:

        DariaH i am sorry! When you said “You mean she should ask those Arabic and African countries that were European colonies for years and years? ” i thought you were reffering to me .I was on my mobile and it appeared under my comment. Or should i drink another cup of coffee. So sorry!

        I agree that Jolie is not here to solve the problem. I think she wants to draw attention to it though.

      • mango says:

        The EU complaints of immigration is laughable, considering how immigrants are fleeing countries that faced instabilty from colonialism. ” Yeah we colonized your country and forced our way in, but nah we aren’t accepting immigrants at this time”. I don’t recall Europeans having visas when they were pillaging our lands. Europeans are upset because rhe effects of colonialsm has come back to bite them in the ass.

      • Greek Chic says:

        mango The complaints are not laughable at all. You don’t live in europe as i understand so i think you have a different point of view that is away from reality. First of all europe faces a financial crisis, immigrants/refugees come here and can’t get a job, don’t have a place to stay.They are starving. No matter how much you want to help them, you just can’t.
        Apart from that how can you compare “your lands” with the european countries that face immigration problems? Most immigrants are stuck here, do you know how small Greece is as a country? or malta? or portugal?
        Also we are talking about today, why go back to the colonial period?

      • M.A.F. says:

        You need to keep in mind that those Arabic (is that even PC?) and African countries have been freed from colonialism since about the 1950’s, while other didn’t get independence until the 1960’s. How easy do you think it is ?

      • Sixer says:

        The majority of these migrants are moving because they are fleeing conflict. Most are displaced within the region – the MENA countries of the Middle East and North Africa – and are hoping, one day, to go home. But until they can, the presence of millions of displaced people will further destablise countries that don’t have the resources to take care of them, and fuel even more conflict within the region

        Those who want to go to Europe have given up entirely on there ever being enough stability to make a decent life. There are fewer of them but, as we are being made all too painfully aware, “fewer” still means hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions.

        Much as I deplore my own country’s (I’m in the UK and we were one of the prime movers behind the suspension of the search and rescue operations in the Med and have taken in only a tiny number of refugees) dreadful policy in this area, and the part that it has played in creating this flood of refugees by its military interventions, the horrible, horrible truth is that it’s not possible to accommodate all those who want to come and neither is it possible for relief agencies to look after them in situ.

        The ONLY hope for these people is a series of negotiated peaces in the region. And that looks about as likely as something that isn’t likely at all.

        It makes me feel full of despair.

      • vodkainmyveins says:

        the thing is, as was said in the speeches, the INTERNATIONAL, as in GLOBAL, community needs to make a concerted effort if they want to *actually* tackle this problem.

        all the European countries should take in as many as they can provide for, same goes for USA and Canada, Australia and NZ, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan and all the rich countries of the Saudi-Arabian peninsula, as well as all of the rich countries in East and SouthEast Asia.

        For starters.

      • Sixer says:

        @ vodkainmyveins – I also agree that all the stable, wealthy countries should be taking in large numbers. However, even if we could get the stony-hearted populations of our countries to accept such a policy, it really wouldn’t solve the problem.

        There are 50m IDPs and refugees in the MENA region. FIFTY MILLION.

        It’s heartbreaking tide of desperate humanity, being exploited by some of the most evil people on earth, but even the most generous asylum efforts would make only a small dent in it.

      • maybeiamcrazy says:

        Europe, itself, is going through an economical crisis and far right parties are rising fast. I am scared for the immigrants and asylum seekers we already have. I am an immigrant from Africa but i am white so i know when people go on a rant about “fucking immigrants” they are not talking about me. It is still unsettling to me, i can’t even imagine how it is for people who had to leave their home. I agree with you Sixer the best Europe can do is negotiating for peace in conflicted areas. If Europe starts taking more asylum seekers far right might get even more crazier.

    • mango says:

      Greek Chic:
      Sorry for the late response.
      I’m actual born and raised in Sweden so i know first hand about these issues. Yes i can compare with the issues European countries are having. Are country was in peace until Italy,France and Britain decided to colonize us. Until this day their is illiegaly oil seismic in somali water. The Italian Government, a major shareholder in ENI (the company) with a stake of over 30%, shares the responsibility for the illegal operations conducted by ENI in Somalia. Countries have been dumping radioactive/toxic waste in Somali’s waters. Over 10 years human rights have been calling the international community to act to stop this dumping. Beccause of this whole range of chronic and accute illnesse are suffered by somalis. These include severe birt defects, such as the abscense of limbs and widespread cancer. One local doctor said he had treated more cases of cancer in one year than he had in his entire professional career before the tsunami. Let’s not forget the illegal fishery on the coast of Somalia. They have been exploting our sea for the last 25 years and labelled all Somalis as pirate to justify. Dividing our country and giving Kenya and Ethiopia are land where Somalis are now being treated second class citizen. Are you really shocked that people want out? Guess what Europeans there consequences for your action.

      • Josephina says:

        Thank you for illustrating the harsh, cruel, devastating effects of colonialism. Too many Americans (Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt NOT included) do not understand the damage colonialism creates today, yesterday and for generations to come.

        The opportunity to inform and learn of its atrocities is virtually wiped out of the U.S. primary and secondary educational system. You can learn about this at a collegiate level, but only by choice as an elective course. The U.S. has a history of and is equally guilty of colonialism. In the beginning, this country’s thirst for greed, economic wealth and independence played a hand in the underdevelopment of the continent of Africa. (See the Great TransAtlantic Slave Trade to the Americas, which spanned over 400 years, for further research.) And let us not forget the forceful displacing of the native Americans, reversing their economic independence and driving them into designated colonies lest to be seen.

        The U.S. also turned a deaf ear initially to Hitler’s massive campaign to annihilate the Jewish population. We were slow to action and even slower for resolution. We did not want them in the U.S. and eventually joined the international community in war. Our country did not welcome the remaining Jews with open arms: we played a passive-aggressive role.

        Even today, large U.S. corporations still play a colonialist role in their business transactions overseas and to the detriment of the economies of the underdeveloped countries. They are not properly regulated nor controlled due to flimsy and lax international laws that are easily circumvented.

        We have a nasty disposition towards immigrants, refugees and their basic rights for humanity (See current trend in legislation to ebb the flow of immigrants from our southern borders) even though we are a nation of comprised of immigrants who were, at one point, coming to America for a better quality of life. How quickly have we forgotten.

        Our attitude is shameful: We want the problem to stay over there where we cannot see it or be affected.

    • imqrious2 says:

      @A.key – No disrespect, but you need to brush up on your history.

      The US *did* turn back a ship of Jewish refugees during WWII (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005267). Almost every person on board that ship was Jewish, fleeing from the Nazis. The boat docked briefly in Cuba, only to let off 22 people with valid US passports; over 900 Jews were not allowed to disembark and find refuge. The ship was sent back to Nazi Germany. Guess what happened to most of them there.

  4. Colette says:

    I am proud of Angie,a “real” girl’s girl, for using her celebrity to highlight important issues like refugees , sexual trafficking,rape,etc
    She also looks lovely.

  5. A.Key says:

    I heard the full speech, it was moving and heartbreaking.

  6. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I admire her so much.

  7. Tough Cookie says:

    Did she forget to pack a bra?

    • Carmen says:

      Was that all you took from this article?

      It was a very powerful speech which will probably have no effect on the current crisis, but somebody had to say it and I commend her for saying it.

      On a personal note she looks impossibly beautiful as per usual. She looks like she’s gained some weight.

    • SnarkySnarkers says:

      YES! I love her but this was a Kim K move. If she has a bra on it is too thin. Maybe she had it on for the speech and took it off afterwards? I know my bra is one of the first things I take off when I get home from work. Best. Feeling. Ever.

      Ps: I know that was superficial of me but this is a celeb gossip site ffs.

      • Perfectly executed Chewbacca sound says:

        Jolie is too highfalutin for Kardashian komparisons. This is a classic Kate Middleton play.

      • SnarkySnarkers says:

        It is classic Waity! You are right! I stand corrected!

    • Flan says:

      Better not respond to articles about issues like this.

      Go have fun in the mall today.

      • anon321 says:

        They have a legitimate argument. A man wouldn’t wear a wifebeater to work nor would a woman go to a job interview with her nipples showing because it’s extremely unprofessional and she wouldn’t be taken seriously. Had Angelina dressed appropriately her speech may have been perceived as powerful but people were looking at her nipples so something was lost in translation. If you want to be taken seriously you have to dress the part.

  8. mimif says:

    Bravo, Angie! On another superficial note, she looks like a total bad ass in those aviators.

    • Kiddo says:

      This role she’s playing in life, right here, is more bad ass than any character in a film, male or female.

      • mimif says:

        Copy that, Kay-Z.

      • Kitten says:

        She looks awesome.

        On an entirely unrelated topic, I have some sad news that I wanted you guys to hear from me first:

        Mark and I broke up.

        (I’ll give you a second to take that in)

        He really hurt my feelings bad on the links post from yesterday.
        I’m still keeping the door open for reconciliation because I think we have something great, but I don’t have high hopes.

        I feel so alone.

        Hold me.

      • Kiddo says:

        Oh, Kitten, I’m so very sorry, climb into Bramhall’s feathery-soft hair and we’ll sing lullabies and down the comet sophies.

      • Kitten says:

        It’s kind of hot in here..does Bramhall’s ‘fro have central A/C?

        Anyway, I need some advice on how to handle things next time I see him around here. Should I play it cool/friendly and pretend like nothing happened or should I ignore him entirely and play hard to get?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Kitten, you can do better. It’s his loss. He’s such a grump. Breaking up is hard to do, though. Hugs.

      • mimif says:

        So, not to make things any more awkward, but…like, how long of a time gap do you need before, you know, mark and I go public?

        *lmao just saw your post from this morning on the links. Stoner shamer!

      • I Choose Me says:

        Couldn’t agree more.

        On another note, who’d have ever thought I’d learn so much on a gossip website? The discussions going on in the comment threads have informed me so much. So much I didn’t know, I didn’t know.

  9. Bliss says:

    Love her and LOVE those shades. Can we get an ID on those?

  10. jen2 says:

    Angelina Jolie Pitt (real bad ass) was able to quietly get into and out of NYC, make two powerful speeches before two important bodies, show us how it is done with grace and intelligence and move on without making much of a fuss. She does more for women and girls than she is given credit for. Good on her!

  11. xboxsucks says:

    TELL THEM!!!!

  12. Cheryl says:

    Agree with the bra comment. It is not fair, but to be taken seriously as a woman in an international stage it helps to erase anything that could be labeled as overtly feminine or suggestingly sexual. Like erect nipples. Should’ve worn a better, heavily lined bra.

    But her message is amazing. And nips or not, the call for action in these areas should be something every world leader is thinking about this morning.

    • Elly says:

      yeah you can see her nipples in almost every photo in the DailyMail article and they (of course!) know and highlight it! Maybe she thought her blazer will cover her boobs? It´s ok that she dislikes bras, but maybe a heavier material for her top or nipple patches would have been an excellent idea? We all know that th UN is a man´s world. So why show your nipples under such a thin top? She is no Kardashian and knows how to dress appropriate.
      The press will jump on her boobs and her speech fades away in the background.

    • jocelyn says:

      Powerful speech, particularly the one on the Women in the World Summit. Angie gets the spotlight, but there were others stars such as Hellen Mirren, Meryl Streep, Robin Wright, Ava Duvernay, who gave amazing insights on a variety of issues about women. I was there all the three days it lasted (working, but also enjoying the speeches) And the highlights moments for me were Hellen Mirren talking about acting roles for women, and Robin Wright, who’s been doing for years so much for the women in Congo, many times from her own pocket. She shared a panel with her pal Samantha Power, the real US Ambassador at the UN. They were both hilarious and inspiring.

    • Crumpet says:

      I shook my head when I saw those photos. If a woman wants people (men) to focus on her message, she must make her face the focus, not her chest. Surely she knows this by now and this was an honest mistake. I will refrain from making snide comments such as I have read regarding other nipples we have seen and people’s responses to them.

      Also, I agree with other posters who take her to task for not holding the US’s feet to the fire for our role in all this.

    • Paige says:

      @ Elly Actually I haven’t seen any articles talking about her breasts. All the ones I’ve seen were on what she spoke about in her speech, so I’m sure it didn’t outdo the message she was sending.

    • goofpuff says:

      maybe the best way for women to be taken seriously is not for other women to criticise her for not wearing a bra – which is a woman’s choice, I didn’t notice it but then I am not focusing on her sexuality or need to clamp down on it. she looks professional and fine. would I wear a bra? yes, but at some point we need to stop sexualising ourself so much. we are worst then men sometimes.

    • Perfectly executed Chewbacca sound says:

      We give Kate Middleton SO MUCH SHIT for slips like this. We’re constantly talking trash about Waity for even more trivial fashion mishaps, like wearing the wrong color or not weighting her skirt or wearing too short of a skirt or too-tight jeans or touching her hair too much.

      Now, Jolie is a lot more accomplished than the Duchess in terms of her charity work, and I don’t think that this is THAT rude or insulting, But she’s a movie star and she presents herself as one, and on a sartorial level, nipples should not be visible when she is at the United Nations. It’s an attention ploy and it’s not wrong to comment on it.

    • KellyBee says:

      For the people complaining about her nipples did any of you watch any of the videos? Because her nipples are not showing at any time then in them. The photos of her above are her leaving the Woman of the World Summit and going back to the Hotel.

      As Paige said both her speeches have been trending on news channels/web sites, gossip blogs, Vanity Fair, Time and so on and not once did any of them mention her nipples.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Women have nipples. Sometimes they show through our clothes. I don’t see the big deal.

      • p says:

        Whilst I agree that the over sexualization of women needs to stop, so does the over sexualization of men, children etc. People should be civilized enough to see the “person”, however there is biology. Most of us are women here and we noticed Jolie’s nipples. It’s human to a degree. Knowing it’s difficult to fight biology (especially so sterotypically for men), it would have been a better decision to wear a bra. Particularly since there has also been so much news of late about her breasts and surgery and fight with breast cancer, that people would naturally look there out of curiosity. This is not a statement suggesting that “she asked for it” because of the way she was dressed.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I think she is wearing a bra, but her shirt is thin silk. Some women have prominent nipples. Why must we act like giggly children about it? Because a man might notice our breasts and “not take us seriously”? Why don’t we just wear a big sack over our bodies then, hiding any hint of our femaleness so as not to distract men? If someone can’t handle the fact that I have breasts, they can just get over it.

      • anon321 says:

        So, you have no need for clothing and go nude in public? Don’t wear clothes to work, to get the newspaper or at the kids soccer games?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Anon321
        Who said anything about going nude? People are complaining that you can see the outline of her nipples through her clothes. I happen to think that she’s dressed professionally in a suit and silk blouse, and don’t get the furor over nipples. And to answer your question, believe me, there would be a huge public outcry if I went nude anywhere outside. Lol for all the wrong reasons.

      • Anonymous says:

        I think the comments are based on the fact that, for most people, this isn’t appropriate attire for a professional setting. In this case it seems to be a harmless mistake and she probably wore her blazer buttoned at first and didn’t realize what was visible when it opened, but it is incongruous with the setting. If I went to a meeting at work with a similar issue, I’m pretty sure people would notice/stare at me too. And if a guy I worked with showed up to work in a sheer shirt with his chest visible through it, I’d think that was inappropriate too. This does not take away from the work she is doing but it’s not that surprising to me that people noticed it.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Anonymous
        Yes, I understand what people are saying. I just don’t agree. She is not in a sheer shirt, and her chest is not visible through her shirt, she is appropriately attired, and the outline of part of her anatomy is visible through her clothes. I just think Americans are so silly about sex. There’s nothing wrong with having nipples, or shameful about their showing. This is just another way for women to be shamed for having bodies that are different from men’s. What is inappropriate about her clothing? It’s all in people’s minds.

      • I Choose Me says:

        So very much this.

    • Jib says:

      I am not a fan of Jolie, but I do admire her for work like this. She could be swanning over at Amal’s three day birthday party on Lake Como. Instead, she spends her time highlighting tragedies such as the immigrant crisis.

      But I also agree with those who say that your nipples showing is not professional and especially in a woman who has been a “bombshell” in the past. It takes away from her very serious message. She needs to be smarter about this kind of thing: dress like a professional woman working in a big city. (Look at the fictional Diane Lockhart’s wardrobe for inspiration – gorgeous, luxe and always professional!) It does make a difference in how your message is perceived.

      And this is not just “in people’s minds.” There are dress codes at businesses for a reason: perception is king.

      • Fan says:

        You are missing the point that her nipples were not showing when she was addressing the UN. That, is the important thing.

    • I Choose Me says:

      How do we know she’s not wearing a bra? And they’re nipples ffs. Sometimes they get hard and show, yes even with a bra on.

      Ironically, Jennifer Aniston gets heavily criticized by Jolie fans when hers show and I think that’s unfair as well.

  13. SuePerb says:

    I know I will get crucified for saying this but it has not “arisen from the ashes of indecision” it has been risen from the ashes of decision. Decision from the Saudis, Turks, Jordanians and the US who fund, arm and lie about what has happened. If they stop funding, arming and training people, there would be no refugees that would be suffering. Isis was born because of these countries and will continue to grow as long as the west keeps pandering to the Saudis. And why are we are now constantly siding with the al qaeda? Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised as the US sided with them since the 70’s when they were dying a death.

    I feel for the refugees. But she does not put pressure on her own country which has a big hand in causing this problem (and has not taken in more than a handful of Syrian refugees). I will take what she says and file it in the same box as other political people who refuse to face the cause of a problem. You cannot put out a fire if you keep putting petrol on it.

    • Kiddo says:

      You will not be crucified. Thanks for your input.

    • DariaH. says:

      Did she excluded US from the criticism? Haven’t noticed that! She is an advocate for refugees, she is trying to secure help for them – there are enough political heads that are pointing fingers at each other.

      • SuePerb says:

        She did point a finger and say “It is sickening to see thousands of refugees drowning on the doorstep of the world’s wealthiest continent. ” but omitted to say that so far the world’s wealthiest continent has taken in 217,000 refugees just from Syria and yet not singled out her own country which took in a measly 335.

      • anon321 says:

        The US has 20 million illegal immigrants and the same number or higher of legal citizens who can’t find a job. We take in more legal immigrants than the rest of the world combined. We accept refugees from Somalia without question, only to have them leave to join ISIS. We are broke as a joke and borrow money from the Chinese to keep the lights on. Please, no more.

      • KellyBee says:

        @DariaH.

        No she didn’t she didn’t call out any specific country.

    • Sixer says:

      I don’t really have a bone to pick with Jolie one way or the other. She’s giving it a go, which is more than most do. I’m not entirely sure how she can imply Russia is the bad guy here, though. We can dislike Russia for many reasons, but not really for the refugees and IDPs from the conflicts in which they didn’t intervene. At least Russia went to get the foreign nationals – including Americans – from Yemen.

      But I agree with Sue in that “we” (by which I mean the US/NATO/the West or whatever term you want to use) seem to want to have this discussion while completely eliding any responsibility for the inevitable consequences of military interventions in terms of refugee numbers. We make bad situations worse and then pretend it’s nothing at all to do with us.

      It’s as if all these refugees suddenly appeared – in their millions – out of nowhere and for no discernible reason.

  14. Shambles says:

    Love her passion and compassion for all people of the world. On a superficial level, she looks absolutely f&cking beautiful. Devastatingly stunning.

  15. nicegirl says:

    WHO RUN THE WORLD – girls!!

    We certainly have got to start somewhere.

    Thank you, Angelina.

    Also, re: the no bra discussion – I too have experienced some very hardcore medical stuff, and wearing a bra is SO VERY painful, I forego it in every single situation I can. I wonder if she might still be in pain, and just figured that her words meant more than her outfit.

    • jane says:

      I also have had hardcore medical things that make wearing bras painful. However, she knows wherever she goes , there will be photographers. She shouldn’t have worn such a thin shirt. Other tops wouldn’t have made them so noticeable

  16. Naddie says:

    Even if her speech is not perfect (I say that by what I’ve read, not by my own world’s knowlegde) I think she’s doing an amazing job. If every rich, influential person in this world were a bit more like her, we’d have a better place to live.

  17. amara says:

    She is so beautiful! I have always liked her for her acting, and even more so for all the good she does around the world.

  18. Amy says:

    @kitten I am confused, were you and Marc really dating IRL? Or did you just like to tease him whenever he commented? I read the links post comments fron yesterday but I really couldn’t tell what was going on. And this is a sarcastic we broke up but were never together post? In any case, my condolences I guess? I don’t post here a lot so I am not all familiar with the different commenters here.

    • Vampi says:

      It’s not real hon.
      I did a double take at first too..but no need for feeling bad girl. 🙂

  19. delighted2 says:

    Maybe she doesn’t see the need to wear a bra. If the point of a bra is to hold up your breasts maybe her new breasts don’t need holding up. If the point of a bra is to pretend you don’t have nipples, maybe shes doesnt see the need to do that either. She doesn’t seem to be much of a social conformist.

  20. Fa says:

    Every news around the world are covering Angie speech but all you talk ant guys is her nipples showing couple of times, is any of you watched her speech there wasn’t any nipples showing as she was sitting the whole time & no one saw what you are talking about guys

  21. sage says:

    Has she gained weight? Her face looks fuller.

  22. naturegirl says:

    My lady!!! There is none more golden

  23. Emily C. says:

    I love all the people who are commenting about her nipples on a post about how women are being sold as sex slaves, literally kept in cages to be sold as sex slaves.

    Because shaming a woman for what she chooses to wear — or maybe for having been unprepared for the air conditioning being turned too high — is TOTALLY what you do when the issue is women being forced into sexual slavery.

    Some people need to take a serious, long look in the mirror. And to realize that it’s luck, and nothing else, that keeps them from being one of those women in cages.

  24. lisa2 says:

    For the people OBSESSED with her nipples.. When she had her surgery her doctor did a new procedure to save her nipples
    Something most women lose after this kind of surgery. They did a procedure where more blood is circulated to the nipple. So YES her nipple are more erect because they are getting a larger blood flow.
    This is what she said about it at the time..

    “nipple delay,” which rules out disease in the breast ducts behind the nipple and draws extra blood flow to the area. This causes some pain and a lot of bruising, but it increases the chance of saving the nipple.

    And strange that women with nipples are so upset by nipples.. I see women with erect nipples all the time. Daily.. who are wearing a bra. Her situation is due to her surgery.
    Women don’t need men to demean what they are doing.. Other women do it just fine. But she looks amazing..and her detractors know this and had to find something..so they reached to the bottom and came up with this.

    she gave a great speech at both events. Eloquent and though out.. To the point and to the heart of the issues being addressed. I’m a HUGE fan an every time I see her I know that she is an amazing woman.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Yeah, as I said above, I don’t get why everyone needs a fainting couch after seeing nipples through clothes. They’re just nipples. We all have them.

    • Frosty says:

      I feel the comments about her nips have more to do with wanting her message to be taken seriously, for her to be taken seriously and that showing nips in front of the security council undermines Angie’s good efforts. I guess that is reason women in important positions in government, heads of state, and elsewhere dress conservatively is to force people to stay focused on their message rather than their bodies.

      • lisa2 says:

        Well none of the articles I have read or tweets talked about her nipples.. They spoke of her message. So maybe there are a limited group of people that can’t see beyond that. She is taken very seriously. And again she looks professional. She is sitting at a table delivering her speech. She is not flashing for the cameras. I think when people on some sites can’t find fault in her looks or weight they pull out the nipple thing. So no these comments are not about her being taken seriously. Just a in to find something. I explained above.. but I’m not waiting for common sense to come into play for some people

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Agree, Lisa2. Excuse her for having breasts while giving a speech. Men are not uncontrollable animals who can’t listen to a speech and be in the same room with nipples. People just want to criticize her for something.

      • Frosty says:

        Argumentative. Oh my goodness, I was just trying to strike a balance, not attack anyone. Some of you are so very quick to attack fellow commenters when you disagree with something they post.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I hope you didn’t feel attacked by me, Frosty. I wasn’t referring to your comment, though I didn’t make that clear. I understood that you were just trying to clarify the position other posters were taking.

  25. Fan says:

    She clearly did wear a bra. Look at her shirt, and see that line stretch in her shirt? That is indicative of bra position. She clearly did wear a bra, its just that her nipple was prominent in ONE of the shots. And that shot was OUTSIDE, in the cool air, as she was leaving. They were never noticeable when she gave her speech INSIDE.

  26. LAK says:

    I never ever thought I’d be more disgusted with comments on this board as I am by some comments here.

    @Querty….shame on you. SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!

  27. Louise177 says:

    If people actually bothered to watch video or photos of her speech, they would know that Angelina’s nipples weren’t even showing until she’s outside. But for some reason people are so quick to hate that they can’t be bothered with the truth. I don’t know why haters don’t understand that their rage and attacks only make themselves look ridiculous not Angelina.