totally agree!! what a load of cynical viewpoints, if anyone else had done it everyone would have said they did the sensible thing investing for their child's future. she hasnt squandered it like a lottery winner on booze, wild parties etc. i think this woman has had way too much unfair press. what has she done exactly apart from marry a plastic face old fogey, who i agree is overrated and had a child by him? she was a bit loopy in her gmtv interview, but anyone whos been through a painful divorce where there are kids involved who has an ounce of emotion in their body behaves irrationally at some stage. i think shes a ballsy woman who didnt let her disability get in the way, i think she looked stunning with her new short hairdo, shes a mum, an intelligent woman with guts and who cares if she was married to an old beatle, shes a person in her own rite - and before anyone says it, no im not on her payroll!:yawn:
*LC hears the sound of someone playing the world's smallest violin*
Invested for her daughter's future? McCartney is already paying her 30 grand a year for her maintenance - much more than most fathers. Does she think he wouldn't care for her? She's spent most of it on properties that she's already selling on, and where are these charities that she's given to? She didn't give to charities at any other time, which was proved by a judge at her divorce hearing, despite her protestations to the contrary.
I do happen to admire her for her persistance as an amputee, it would have been easy for her to give up on life, but when push comes to shove it seems as if she does nothing in her life without some kind of agenda. Her lies are well documented, and as I said ^, she's never sued, so for me that in itself says a lot about her.
totally agree!! what a load of cynical viewpoints, if anyone else had done it everyone would have said they did the sensible thing investing for their child's future. she hasnt squandered it like a lottery winner on booze, wild parties etc. i think this woman has had way too much unfair press. what has she done exactly apart from marry a plastic face old fogey, who i agree is overrated and had a child by him? she was a bit loopy in her gmtv interview, but anyone whos been through a painful divorce where there are kids involved who has an ounce of emotion in their body behaves irrationally at some stage. i think shes a ballsy woman who didnt let her disability get in the way, i think she looked stunning with her new short hairdo, shes a mum, an intelligent woman with guts and who cares if she was married to an old beatle, shes a person in her own rite - and before anyone says it, no im not on her payroll!:yawn:
I don't know anybody who is bothered that she married McCartney, it is not like she or anyone else would be robbing young girls of their heartthrob anymore is it. All the bad press comes from her being a brittle, seemingly humourless character who plays fast and loose with the truth to portray a fantasy of herself as a cross between Princess Diana and Mother Theresa to the world. Truly altruistic people do not spend their lives telling everyone how altruistic they are.
I don't know anybody who is bothered that she married McCartney, it is not like she or anyone else would be robbing young girls of their heartthrob anymore is it. All the bad press comes from her being a brittle, seemingly humourless character who plays fast and loose with the truth to portray a fantasy of herself as a cross between Princess Diana and Mother Theresa to the world. Truly altruistic people do not spend their lives telling everyone how altruistic they are.
like someone said above, linda got the same kind of hate when she married him, to be honest i think she was nuts marrying into that family, youre right hes no heartthrob, he looks like he believes hes gods gift and that stella creature, who'd want her as a daughter in law, sour faced little madam. your phrase seemingly humourless sums it up, who knows what shes like in private, she may have cried endlessly over the marriage breakup, she doesnt seem hardfaced or emotionless, who wouldnt defend themself when there constantly slated, at the end of the day she had a kid by him (and believe me no amount of money would have persuaded me to sleep with a creepy old geezer like that!) so good luck to her, shes no princess di or mother theresa but shes a human being and the mother of his child so deserves some respect for that alone
Perhaps he has already given as much as he will for the child.
Nevermind Heather, Ronnie Wood is on the loose, there is another old sop waiting for your tender touch to loosen his wallet strings.
Tightwad?
£2.5 million to buy her mother a home, 35 odd grand a year for schooling plus more for a nanny doesn't sound like a tightwad to me....
Yes HE may have earnt millions, but why should his children automatically be entitled to endless handouts and a life of non-working luxury?
Seems to me that Stella is all the better for NOT having been given that sort of lifestyle (I can't imagine she has ever wanted for anything though), anyways there are MANY examples of vapid, spolit 'rich-kids' who do nothing but act like idiots...
I am sure that there will be many a million in Trust for his children when he eventually shuffles off this mortal coil and I am even more sure that he will ensure Heather cannot get her hands on ANY of it...
As for Heather, I think her card is (rightly) forever marked after all her attempts to malign her ex-husband in the (admitted) quest for more money...to subsequently talk about having spent all of that money shows an almost complete lack of class...
So Heather has given the vast majority of her millions to charity? Really? She made this claim in the divorce court that she had donated millions to charity but could not come up with any kind of evidence from her tax declarations to prove this statement. She makes all these kind of statements to the media but can never prove anything. Remember the interview she gave to Piers Morgan (when she was married to Paul and wanted to show the world she was not a gold digger or had any problems with Stella and Co)insisting she was independantly wealthy and was using her own money to buy a house near Brighton and it turned out that Paul had bought the house and in her tax returns during ther marriage to Paul her income was nill. How can she say she is a charity fund raiser on Dancing on Ice?? All Heather is interested in doing is promoting herself and getting into the media spotlight.
I never understood the blind spot the british press have for Sir Paul..he comes over as quite obnoxious..the prime example was taking Centre Stage in Xfactor then few days later saying negative stuff about those type of shows...
The guys attitude is very much like Sir Cliff richard another one who thinks the world will end if he doesnt keep performing....
Maybe she considers herself a charity case :rolleyes: As for Sir Paul not giving money easily, I don't think his children have to go pick bins to survive or something. It's better for them anyway if they don't get everything served on a golden plate.
You dont think he offered that sum of money from the bottom of his heart do you?
Dragged into court for it, his private life on show, just so he didnt have to give her any more than necessary.
I dislike the pair of them but the man does have the reputation of a tightwad and given it by his own daughter.
Dragged into court by a greedy soon to be ex-wife who CHOSE to include his daughter in the nastiness of the divorce.
Do you think he would have seen their daughter without money for education, a decent home or decent child-care? Or do you think he felt the need to have a judge specify what money was for his child rather than it be given to a mother who he believed (now proven) would spend it and would subsequently drag his reputation through the media every time she wanted more money 'for their daughter'?
Again it is HIS money, he earnt it. If he chooses not to hand it out because of some mis-guided belief that children of rich parents should get a free ride, then why should he be criticised for it?
I am sure that BOTH Stella and Bea want(ed) for NOTHING whilst they were in his care, living in any of his multi-million pound homes...and will benefit even more when his time comes to meet his maker...
However I have to say here and now that I really admired her on Dancing on Ice. She is an inspiration to other amputees
When she said she had looked everywhere for other amputees who ice-skates she couldn't find anyone anywhere...she didn't try very hard.
Sorry as far as I am concerned this is who I admire!:) and he doesn't bang on about it at every oppertunity.:rolleyes: Plus he has both legs amputated.
£2.5 million to buy her mother a home, 35 odd grand a year for schooling plus more for a nanny doesn't sound like a tightwad to me....
Yes HE may have earnt millions, but why should his children automatically be entitled to endless handouts and a life of non-working luxury?
Seems to me that Stella is all the better for NOT having been given that sort of lifestyle (I can't imagine she has ever wanted for anything though), anyways there are MANY examples of vapid, spolit 'rich-kids' who do nothing but act like idiots...
I am sure that there will be many a million in Trust for his children when he eventually shuffles off this mortal coil and I am even more sure that he will ensure Heather cannot get her hands on ANY of it...
As for Heather, I think her card is (rightly) forever marked after all her attempts to malign her ex-husband in the (admitted) quest for more money...to subsequently talk about having spent all of that money shows an almost complete lack of class...
He bought all of his children houses and cars. He helped Stella and Mary launch their careers, and has supported (daughter) Heather and James, who have apparently got through life without any proper careers at all. At the age of 32, James is recording an album and going on tour. Where do people think his income is coming from? Tightwad indeed!
That was a very silly remark from Stella made at a time when she was obviously very angry with her father. I hope she feels ashamed that she said it.
So Heather has given the vast majority of her millions to charity? Really? She made this claim in the divorce court that she had donated millions to charity but could not come up with any kind of evidence from her tax declarations to prove this statement. She makes all these kind of statements to the media but can never prove anything. Remember the interview she gave to Piers Morgan (when she was married to Paul and wanted to show the world she was not a gold digger or had any problems with Stella and Co)insisting she was independantly wealthy and was using her own money to buy a house near Brighton and it turned out that Paul had bought the house and in her tax returns during ther marriage to Paul her income was nill. How can she say she is a charity fund raiser on Dancing on Ice?? All Heather is interested in doing is promoting herself and getting into the media spotlight.
Absolutely Right. Let's see proof of all these charitable donations. Why? Because the reported evidence that she's not living up to all the things she's been saying continues to grow.
Remember the Russian woman who was promised new prosthetic legs (c. £10,000) by Heather? Result: She never got them
There's a couple more that make me smile - because they're so typical of the woman and her desire for recognition. Did you know that in 2008, Heather won the "Animal Rights Activist of the Year" award? Don't believe me? Here's the evidence from her own site
That means that Heather was recognised as more deserving of the award than all those poor sods fighting off the Japanese Whalers, the corporations and their Lab Animals and all the unspeakably horrific and ongoing acts of savagery that man sees fit to do to the animals. Wow. And, on receiving the award she went on to make a powerful speech...well, her web site tells the full story.
But of course, it didn't quite happen that way. The award she actually won was the Celebrity Animal Rights Activist of the Year. Someone else (who actually had been out there fighting of the Whalers) was also given the same award. Other activists were given awards, too. As as for Heather's speech...well, that was remembered differently too.
Elsewhere on Heather's website there's a video of her work involving amputees, landmines and Animal Cruelty.It's a moving, well put-together video and, no question, it shows Heather's determination. However, if you watch it you will, like me, come away with the impression that Heather Mills singlehandedly managed to get all Cat and Dog Fur banned by the European Parliament.
I just detest the pair of them, I would like both of them to go on a lifelong cruise with the likes of Katie Price & entourage, Kerry Katona & The Beckhams and end up in the Bermuda Triangle.
People who genuinely work to make this world a better place don`t have the time to bleat about getting recognition for it, nor does it even bother them.
As for the divorce settlement, my understanding is it only went to court because of Heather`s demands. I really can`t imagine her accepting any amount of money out of court, so the judge had to decide. The irony is, she probably could have had more money if she had settled out of court.
I just detest the pair of them, I would like both of them to go on a lifelong cruise with the likes of Katie Price & entourage, Kerry Katona & The Beckhams and end up in the Bermuda Triangle.
You really think Paul McCartney is in the same class as Kerry Katona?!:eek:This is what Mills did to him.:(
I apologise if this has been posted before, I was given the wrong kind of ladder & there was plastic on the floor!
Doubts were fuelled about Heather McCartney Mills's grip on reality when she gave an interview to The Sunday Times in which she claimed she had been offered a peerage, asked by the three main political parties to stand for parliament, and said she'd backed out of a meeting with President Bill Clinton because she didn't think she could be seen publicly endorsing the Democrats
That's the kind of thing that makes it seem she has sometimes crossed the boundary between optimistic exaggeration and sheer wishful thinking.
I disagree with those who say she is getting the same reception as Linda had back in the day. No one could quite see why the godlike Beatle was dumping the beautiful English rose that was jane Asher and taking up with an older, plainer American with a daughter; people took the mick out of Linda's contribution to the Wings sound (which was to sing out of tune); but that was about the extent of it. From the very beginning of the relationship, Heather Mills has been accused by the press of making stuff up, to her advantage. During her marriage the press backed off, not wishing to tangle with Paul's wife; now the gloves are off. Some of it may be unfair, but really she does herself no favours.
As for the interview that sparked off the thread, I think that even if true, giving away a huge chunk of your divorce settlement to charity is morally confused. The whole point of the big divorce settlement, after a short marriage, was to allow her a lifestyle that would not be distressing to the daughter; the courts are meant to ensure if possible that dramatic differences in lifestyle between parents are not too obvious. If Mills chooses to give away the money, she can hardly then complain that Beatrice doesn't have much. Eventually Beatrice can make her own views clear.
I dont think Heather was to blame for a lot of the marriage problems, there was blame on both sides.
He was older, used to being in control and often used drugs, Linda had also had problems within their marriage but had kept quiet.
Heather was there for the ride
Two very spoiled opinionated people who clashed head on
I dont think Paul is a good singer, in fact in the sixties he was sometimes appallingly off key in live performances and certainly wouldnt make it to the X Factor on those performances.
His talent lay in song writing and in that he was one of the best ever.
Why this talent should afford him the God like following he has amazes me. As a person, perhaps he deserved someone like Heather, totally different from his adoring public, his choice, his loss.
As with all divorces, I am sure there were faults on both sides. the problem with Heather is she is refusing to take any of the blame whatsoever!
Getting back to Stella and her "tight bastard" silly remark- she recently said in an interview that she has been able to take risks with her fashion line (no leather, etc) because she knows she will always be ok for money.
As for Paul and Linda, yes, of course the marriage had problems like any other, and they admitted as much. It`s the tabloids that have turned that marriage into a fairytale.
in fact in the sixties he was sometimes appallingly off key in live performances and certainly wouldnt make it to the X Factor on those performances.
.
Yeah, that`s the benchmark, of course!
The Beatles stopped touring in the mid-sixties and were barely audible when they did play (and they couldn`t hear themselves). I wonder which performances you are talking about.
Comments
*LC hears the sound of someone playing the world's smallest violin*
Invested for her daughter's future? McCartney is already paying her 30 grand a year for her maintenance - much more than most fathers. Does she think he wouldn't care for her? She's spent most of it on properties that she's already selling on, and where are these charities that she's given to? She didn't give to charities at any other time, which was proved by a judge at her divorce hearing, despite her protestations to the contrary.
I do happen to admire her for her persistance as an amputee, it would have been easy for her to give up on life, but when push comes to shove it seems as if she does nothing in her life without some kind of agenda. Her lies are well documented, and as I said ^, she's never sued, so for me that in itself says a lot about her.
I don't know anybody who is bothered that she married McCartney, it is not like she or anyone else would be robbing young girls of their heartthrob anymore is it. All the bad press comes from her being a brittle, seemingly humourless character who plays fast and loose with the truth to portray a fantasy of herself as a cross between Princess Diana and Mother Theresa to the world. Truly altruistic people do not spend their lives telling everyone how altruistic they are.
like someone said above, linda got the same kind of hate when she married him, to be honest i think she was nuts marrying into that family, youre right hes no heartthrob, he looks like he believes hes gods gift and that stella creature, who'd want her as a daughter in law, sour faced little madam. your phrase seemingly humourless sums it up, who knows what shes like in private, she may have cried endlessly over the marriage breakup, she doesnt seem hardfaced or emotionless, who wouldnt defend themself when there constantly slated, at the end of the day she had a kid by him (and believe me no amount of money would have persuaded me to sleep with a creepy old geezer like that!) so good luck to her, shes no princess di or mother theresa but shes a human being and the mother of his child so deserves some respect for that alone
Tightwad?
£2.5 million to buy her mother a home, 35 odd grand a year for schooling plus more for a nanny doesn't sound like a tightwad to me....
Yes HE may have earnt millions, but why should his children automatically be entitled to endless handouts and a life of non-working luxury?
Seems to me that Stella is all the better for NOT having been given that sort of lifestyle (I can't imagine she has ever wanted for anything though), anyways there are MANY examples of vapid, spolit 'rich-kids' who do nothing but act like idiots...
I am sure that there will be many a million in Trust for his children when he eventually shuffles off this mortal coil and I am even more sure that he will ensure Heather cannot get her hands on ANY of it...
As for Heather, I think her card is (rightly) forever marked after all her attempts to malign her ex-husband in the (admitted) quest for more money...to subsequently talk about having spent all of that money shows an almost complete lack of class...
Dragged into court for it, his private life on show, just so he didnt have to give her any more than necessary.
I dislike the pair of them but the man does have the reputation of a tightwad and given it by his own daughter.
I never understood the blind spot the british press have for Sir Paul..he comes over as quite obnoxious..the prime example was taking Centre Stage in Xfactor then few days later saying negative stuff about those type of shows...
The guys attitude is very much like Sir Cliff richard another one who thinks the world will end if he doesnt keep performing....
Dragged into court by a greedy soon to be ex-wife who CHOSE to include his daughter in the nastiness of the divorce.
Do you think he would have seen their daughter without money for education, a decent home or decent child-care? Or do you think he felt the need to have a judge specify what money was for his child rather than it be given to a mother who he believed (now proven) would spend it and would subsequently drag his reputation through the media every time she wanted more money 'for their daughter'?
Again it is HIS money, he earnt it. If he chooses not to hand it out because of some mis-guided belief that children of rich parents should get a free ride, then why should he be criticised for it?
I am sure that BOTH Stella and Bea want(ed) for NOTHING whilst they were in his care, living in any of his multi-million pound homes...and will benefit even more when his time comes to meet his maker...
When she said she had looked everywhere for other amputees who ice-skates she couldn't find anyone anywhere...she didn't try very hard.
Sorry as far as I am concerned this is who I admire!:) and he doesn't bang on about it at every oppertunity.:rolleyes: Plus he has both legs amputated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpMNYqHTats
He bought all of his children houses and cars. He helped Stella and Mary launch their careers, and has supported (daughter) Heather and James, who have apparently got through life without any proper careers at all. At the age of 32, James is recording an album and going on tour. Where do people think his income is coming from? Tightwad indeed!
That was a very silly remark from Stella made at a time when she was obviously very angry with her father. I hope she feels ashamed that she said it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/heather-mills-mccartney-secrets-and-lies-478927.html
I apologise if this has been posted before, I was given the wrong kind of ladder & there was plastic on the floor!
Absolutely Right. Let's see proof of all these charitable donations. Why? Because the reported evidence that she's not living up to all the things she's been saying continues to grow.
Remember how she was giving her DWTS fee to charity?
Result: She was paid $175,000 but only $79,000 went to charity.
Remember the million dollars (of veggie burgers that her own firm was making) she was giving away to the poor of New York?
Result: The charities founder is saying that only one fifth was received.
Remember the Russian woman who was promised new prosthetic legs (c. £10,000) by Heather?
Result: She never got them
There's a couple more that make me smile - because they're so typical of the woman and her desire for recognition. Did you know that in 2008, Heather won the "Animal Rights Activist of the Year" award? Don't believe me? Here's the evidence from her own site
That means that Heather was recognised as more deserving of the award than all those poor sods fighting off the Japanese Whalers, the corporations and their Lab Animals and all the unspeakably horrific and ongoing acts of savagery that man sees fit to do to the animals. Wow. And, on receiving the award she went on to make a powerful speech...well, her web site tells the full story.
But of course, it didn't quite happen that way. The award she actually won was the Celebrity Animal Rights Activist of the Year. Someone else (who actually had been out there fighting of the Whalers) was also given the same award. Other activists were given awards, too. As as for Heather's speech...well, that was remembered differently too.
Elsewhere on Heather's website there's a video of her work involving amputees, landmines and Animal Cruelty. It's a moving, well put-together video and, no question, it shows Heather's determination. However, if you watch it you will, like me, come away with the impression that Heather Mills singlehandedly managed to get all Cat and Dog Fur banned by the European Parliament.
Again - this is what actually happened..
Truths, half-truths, outright fallacies - you never know where you are with Heather.
As for the divorce settlement, my understanding is it only went to court because of Heather`s demands. I really can`t imagine her accepting any amount of money out of court, so the judge had to decide. The irony is, she probably could have had more money if she had settled out of court.
ROFL DOH! I wish I'd made that joke
That's the kind of thing that makes it seem she has sometimes crossed the boundary between optimistic exaggeration and sheer wishful thinking.
I disagree with those who say she is getting the same reception as Linda had back in the day. No one could quite see why the godlike Beatle was dumping the beautiful English rose that was jane Asher and taking up with an older, plainer American with a daughter; people took the mick out of Linda's contribution to the Wings sound (which was to sing out of tune); but that was about the extent of it. From the very beginning of the relationship, Heather Mills has been accused by the press of making stuff up, to her advantage. During her marriage the press backed off, not wishing to tangle with Paul's wife; now the gloves are off. Some of it may be unfair, but really she does herself no favours.
As for the interview that sparked off the thread, I think that even if true, giving away a huge chunk of your divorce settlement to charity is morally confused. The whole point of the big divorce settlement, after a short marriage, was to allow her a lifestyle that would not be distressing to the daughter; the courts are meant to ensure if possible that dramatic differences in lifestyle between parents are not too obvious. If Mills chooses to give away the money, she can hardly then complain that Beatrice doesn't have much. Eventually Beatrice can make her own views clear.
She's an idiot. And a liar. Which is proven.
He was older, used to being in control and often used drugs, Linda had also had problems within their marriage but had kept quiet.
Heather was there for the ride
Two very spoiled opinionated people who clashed head on
I dont think Paul is a good singer, in fact in the sixties he was sometimes appallingly off key in live performances and certainly wouldnt make it to the X Factor on those performances.
His talent lay in song writing and in that he was one of the best ever.
Why this talent should afford him the God like following he has amazes me. As a person, perhaps he deserved someone like Heather, totally different from his adoring public, his choice, his loss.
Getting back to Stella and her "tight bastard" silly remark- she recently said in an interview that she has been able to take risks with her fashion line (no leather, etc) because she knows she will always be ok for money.
As for Paul and Linda, yes, of course the marriage had problems like any other, and they admitted as much. It`s the tabloids that have turned that marriage into a fairytale.
Yeah, that`s the benchmark, of course!
The Beatles stopped touring in the mid-sixties and were barely audible when they did play (and they couldn`t hear themselves). I wonder which performances you are talking about.