About your bit in bold.
The fact that PA has been in a mental institution, has suffered life-limiting panic attacks, and has to take medication for stress should really alert you to the fact that PA is damaged, rather than open-season material.
I have to agree with you here and i don't think the public is aware of the full situation, though neither should they be, its private.
But then the problem there is that he airs what is supposedly his private life to the nation, and he puts himself willingly in the public eye - so they have the right to comment.
Dexie, are you sure the pug twitter accounts are Pete's and not set up by fans? I thought the earlier suggestion that other family members were probably taking care of them sounded right. I hope they reappear soon to put everyone's minds at rest.
It was the most rewarding 9 months of my life - I know that sounds absolutely ridiculous, but it was so special.
I actually came here to post something else, but saw your post and couldn't not respond.
I have now forgotten what I wanted to say ....... (which is probably not such bad thing)
It's not ridiculous JC, - I know exactly what you mean and it made me smile to know someone else felt that special and rewarding feeling too. It took a few months after she died to feel it but when it did, it took most of the grief away
As for ‘Pug gate‘….sounds like desperation to me . If the detractors are hoping Pete has got rid of the dogs, so they can make something of it, they are going to be disappointed.
It appears the pugs are alive and well and still valued members of the household. Charlie has made several tweets and posted a photo in last 24 hrs. They do know that the dogs have their own twitter, right…?
When asked about his on-screen absence, Charlie replied: “I was naughty so he said I might not get shown”.
(PMSL at the thought of the non-fans rushing over to check the twitter of one of Pete’s pets…:D )
Didn't Peter make a big song and dance about being POOTY (pet owner of the year ) and taking the cameras along to Battery dogs Home? Wasn't that part of his 'how great am I? Repertoire? Well the dogs don't appear to be around and people have given him goodwill for getting a rescue dog - if that dog - whom he has introduced to his audience is no longer with Peter, I think his fans, who have made an emotional investment in him over his choices, have the right to know, that's quite reasonable, no?
I have to agree with you here and i don't think the public is aware of the full situation, though neither should they be, its private.
But then the problem there is that he airs what is supposedly his private life to the nation, and he puts himself willingly in the public eye - so they have the right to comment.
In which ever early K&P series I watched, he spoke openly with a psychologist about how he's on the lowest dose of antidepressant and looking to come off it. It's not a secret he's on medications, it's another part of his life he's played out in front of camera. He may have withheld other aspects of his mental heath for all we know - but I maintain, it has nothing to do with Peter Andre's narcissism.
Didn't Peter make a big song and dance about being POOTY (pet owner of the year ) and taking the cameras along to Battery dogs Home? Wasn't that part of his 'how great am I? Repertoire? Well the dogs don't appear to be around and people have given him goodwill for getting a rescue dog - if that dog - whom he has introduced to his audience is no longer with Peter, I think his fans, who have made an emotional investment in him over his choices, have the right to know, that's quite reasonable, no?
I don't see that, as yet, there's any good reason to believe he's re-homed them. Unless someone else lives in his home, he must have had to make regular arrangements for them when he's been away on tour or on holiday which could well have been with someone in the family. I find it quite understandable if whoever that is took care of them towards the end of Andrew's life and perhaps that became extended when Pete was in a bad way afterwards. He's been away in Kenya and Spain and now filming intensively with 60MM so again someone would need to be taking care of them for him. I looked after my Mum's dog for several months when she had a prolonged period in hospital and he settled back quite happily with her when she was discharged. Perhaps the film crew should have arranged for them to be featured so no questions arose but they probably underestimate the pettiness of his critics.
Looks like Gordon the Gopher might be returning:D:D:D:D
If Peter Andre does not remember is last live presenting catastrophe with Beiber, he is now wanting to return and present live Saturday morning children's television:rolleyes:
Not content with making his own children happy and telling us constantly, he now wants to make the children of the nation happy.
I love the "I told my manager Claire" etc and one can only imagine the brainstorming meetings at CAN for Andre. Perhaps they have to draw straws on who tells him he is too old for children's television and his live presenting skills are crap.
My bet is they treat him like a 5 year old, distract him, and its soon forgotten:D:D:D
I don't see that, as yet, there's any good reason to believe he's re-homed them. Unless someone else lives in his home, he must have had to make regular arrangements for them when he's been away on tour or on holiday which could well have been with someone in the family. I find it quite understandable if whoever that is took care of them towards the end of Andrew's life and perhaps that became extended when Pete was in a bad way afterwards. He's been away in Kenya and Spain and now filming intensively with 60MM so again someone would need to be taking care of them for him. I looked after my Mum's dog for several months when she had a prolonged period in hospital and he settled back quite happily with her when she was discharged. Perhaps the film crew should have arranged for them to be featured so no questions arose but they probably underestimate the pettiness of his critics.
It looks like his fans were asking where the pugs have gone before the critics did..so are the fans petty too? If your lifestyle is not compatible with dog ownership - or if you buy pets for any other reason other than well thought out, life long devotion to them, you shouldn't buy pets..and you certainly shouldn't be scoring Brownie points by getting them from high profile charities IMO.
I don't see that, as yet, there's any good reason to believe he's re-homed them. Unless someone else lives in his home, he must have had to make regular arrangements for them when he's been away on tour or on holiday which could well have been with someone in the family. I find it quite understandable if whoever that is took care of them towards the end of Andrew's life and perhaps that became extended when Pete was in a bad way afterwards. He's been away in Kenya and Spain and now filming intensively with 60MM so again someone would need to be taking care of them for him. I looked after my Mum's dog for several months when she had a prolonged period in hospital and he settled back quite happily with her when she was discharged. Perhaps the film crew should have arranged for them to be featured so no questions arose but they probably underestimate the pettiness of his critics.
The pettiness of his critics? Oh dear. Are we back to slagging off anyone who dares to question the DOTY?
Surely, even as a fan, you can see why people might be wondering where they've disappeared to without it being solely a 'picking on Pete' exercise?
.......................My bet is they treat him like a 5 year old, distract him, and its soon forgotten:D:D:D
Maybe its a bit like that Dawn French ad where she dangles the inflatable squeaky chicken in front of the Churchill Dog and then chucks it over to the other side of the room with Our Hero in hot pursuit ?
Personally i wouldnt be able to get over the excitement what with the tropical fish and everythin :cool:
I wonder if his "hot dogs" have been checked for horsemeat :eek:
Well aren't we still awaiting a report that one of his non-fans sent off for when they thought his coffee shop was a sh it-hole?
Looks like Gordon the Gopher might be returning:D:D:D:D
If Peter Andre does not remember is last live presenting catastrophe with Beiber, he is now wanting to return and present live Saturday morning children's television:rolleyes:
I wouldn't say it was a catastrophe, he started interviewing him and was told by someone off-camera to stop, then he had to wait a few seconds. He's warm & personable, hardly catastrophic:rolleyes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mgL1lORNuE
It looks like his fans were asking where the pugs have gone before the critics did..so are the fans petty too? If your lifestyle is not compatible with dog ownership - or if you buy pets for any other reason other than well thought out, life long devotion to them, you shouldn't buy pets..and you certainly shouldn't be scoring Brownie points by getting them from high profile charities IMO.
It's fair enough to ask where they are but it's a big jump to accuse him of only getting them as a PR exercise and as for attacking him for supporting Battersea Dogs Home
I quite agree owners who work away from home should think very carefully before taking on a pet but I expect that he would be required to detail the arrangements he was making for their care with Battersea and they wouldn't have allowed him to take on a dog unless they were fully satisfied.
The pettiness of his critics? Oh dear. Are we back to slagging off anyone who dares to question the DOTY?
You're quite right I shouldn't have allowed my impressions of other posters to slip out - I usually try my level best not to. Bad Sam! I'll go back to letting your posts speak for themselves.
You're quite right I shouldn't have allowed my impressions of other posters to slip out - I usually try my level best not to. Bad Sam! I'll go back to letting your posts speak for themselves.
Good. I'll try not let my impressions of some of his fans' inability to see posters as individuals and instead lump them all, childishly, together as one big biased Anti-Pete army, whose opinions can therefore all be written off as illogical dislike, affect my future posting. :cool:
Which reminds me, were you not the person asking on here for others NOT to do exactly that? And to treat posters as individuals and not paint them all with the same brush? I think you were. One rule for you then, Sensei?
It looks like his fans were asking where the pugs have gone before the critics did..so are the fans petty too? If your lifestyle is not compatible with dog ownership - or if you buy pets for any other reason other than well thought out, life long devotion to them, you shouldn't buy pets..and you certainly shouldn't be scoring Brownie points by getting them from high profile charities IMO.
He probably just wanted to have a dog and potential owners are anyway vetted by Battersea Dogs Home. Some will say it is to get brownie points, others will see it positively and say it raises awareness of the possibility of giving a home to a homeless dog rather than getting one from a breeder - which view you take depends on how you see Pete.
Anyway, it seems he does still have the dogs - both have twitter accounts, he says on his website that he has two pugs. If they had been given away, someone would surely come forward at some point. I don't see what more he can do or why he should.
As for having them on the show, maybe they don't like it. I am sure he makes arrangements for them when he goes away - Battersea will have anyway asked him about this before entrusting him with a dog.
On the other hand, I don't think people should get dogs or any animal if they are not prepared to commit themselves for the lifetime of their pets, 15 1/2 years in the case of my previous dog. They do not realise the psychological life-long damage that can be caused by casting aside an unwanted dog.
Good. I'll try not let my impressions of some of his fans' inability to see posters as individuals and instead lump them all, childishly, together as one big biased Anti-Pete army, whose opinions can therefore all be written off as illogical dislike, affect my future posting. :cool:
Which reminds me, were you not the person asking on here for others NOT to do exactly that? And to treat posters as individuals and not paint them all with the same brush? I think you were. One rule for you then, Sensei?
I'm quite happy for my overall posting history to speak for itself Lexi, you're not exactly consistent yourself Feel free to place me on ignore if you have problems with me
I'm quite happy for my overall posting history to speak for itself Lexi, you're not exactly consistent yourself Feel free to place me in ignore if you have problems with me
Why? Because I sometimes defend Pete?
I have no probs with you, you're a very reasonable and balanced poster, I just don't understand why sometimes you seem to find it difficult to separate the wheat (valid criticism) from the chaff (anti-Pete ranting) where PA is concerned.
He probably just wanted to have a dog and potential owners are anyway vetted by Battersea Dogs Home. Some will say it is to get brownie points, others will see it positively and say it raises awareness of the possibility of giving a home to a homeless dog rather than getting one from a breeder - which view you take depends on how you see Pete.
Anyway, it seems he does still have the dogs - both have twitter accounts, he says on his website that he has two pugs. If they had been given away, someone would surely come forward at some point. I don't see what more he can do or why he should.
As for having them on the show, maybe they don't like it. I am sure he makes arrangements for them when he goes away - Battersea will have anyway asked him about this before entrusting him with a dog.
On the other hand, I don't think people should get dogs or any animal if they are not prepared to commit themselves for the lifetime of their pets, 15 1/2 years in the case of my previous dog. They do not realise the psychological life-long damage that can be caused by casting aside an unwanted dog.
I set up a Facebook page for my cat and the lazy wench can't be arsed updating it. Never replies to friend requests or invites to games.
If Pete's pugs are intelligent enough to tweet :rolleyes:, maybe they've engaged a solicitor to safeguard their privacy and have them removed from any filming.
One positive for those who like him - Pete was on This Morning today, or at least one part of his special cancer series from the Royal Marsden. I haven't seen any of the others, but I thought he did a good job. He seemed well-informed and did well when talking to patients and doctors. He does seem better when talking freely with people rather than when reading from a script, but I suppose that comes with practice. He had good feedback from viewers too, although they may have been comments from fans!
You mean on This Morning - I thought he did it well. Sympathetic with the patients, letting them do most of the talking, and asking the doctor questions about the new techniques and machines, who also did most of the talking. I am not sure where he was 'patronising or cringey'
You mean on This Morning - I thought he did it well. Sympathetic with the patients, letting them do most of the talking, and asking the doctor questions about the new techniques and machines, who also did most of the talking. I am not sure where he was 'patronising or cringey'
I agree Liz. He did well, and the section was very informative .
Cringey is normally the word I would use to describe PA & I only saw the second half of this but he actually surprised me, I thought he came over not too bad at all.
Though a caller at the end did have to spoil the moment by reminding us "how much he loved his family".
It's not ridiculous JC, - I know exactly what you mean and it made me smile to know someone else felt that special and rewarding feeling too. It took a few months after she died to feel it but when it did, it took most of the grief away
Nice to know that you have that special feeling too Daisy. :cool: You get what I mean. :)
Comments
Personally i wouldnt be able to get over the excitement what with the tropical fish and everythin :cool:
I wonder if his "hot dogs" have been checked for horsemeat :eek:
I have to agree with you here and i don't think the public is aware of the full situation, though neither should they be, its private.
But then the problem there is that he airs what is supposedly his private life to the nation, and he puts himself willingly in the public eye - so they have the right to comment.
Dexie, are you sure the pug twitter accounts are Pete's and not set up by fans? I thought the earlier suggestion that other family members were probably taking care of them sounded right. I hope they reappear soon to put everyone's minds at rest.
It's not ridiculous JC, - I know exactly what you mean and it made me smile to know someone else felt that special and rewarding feeling too. It took a few months after she died to feel it but when it did, it took most of the grief away
Didn't Peter make a big song and dance about being POOTY (pet owner of the year
In which ever early K&P series I watched, he spoke openly with a psychologist about how he's on the lowest dose of antidepressant and looking to come off it. It's not a secret he's on medications, it's another part of his life he's played out in front of camera. He may have withheld other aspects of his mental heath for all we know - but I maintain, it has nothing to do with Peter Andre's narcissism.
Oh yes. It's such an informative show. I learn so much! :cool:
Now where are those little pugs...
I don't see that, as yet, there's any good reason to believe he's re-homed them. Unless someone else lives in his home, he must have had to make regular arrangements for them when he's been away on tour or on holiday which could well have been with someone in the family. I find it quite understandable if whoever that is took care of them towards the end of Andrew's life and perhaps that became extended when Pete was in a bad way afterwards. He's been away in Kenya and Spain and now filming intensively with 60MM so again someone would need to be taking care of them for him. I looked after my Mum's dog for several months when she had a prolonged period in hospital and he settled back quite happily with her when she was discharged. Perhaps the film crew should have arranged for them to be featured so no questions arose but they probably underestimate the pettiness of his critics.
If Peter Andre does not remember is last live presenting catastrophe with Beiber, he is now wanting to return and present live Saturday morning children's television:rolleyes:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/entertainment/news/peter-andre-wants-to-be-a-tv-presenter-29269014.html
Not content with making his own children happy and telling us constantly, he now wants to make the children of the nation happy.
I love the "I told my manager Claire" etc and one can only imagine the brainstorming meetings at CAN for Andre. Perhaps they have to draw straws on who tells him he is too old for children's television and his live presenting skills are crap.
My bet is they treat him like a 5 year old, distract him, and its soon forgotten:D:D:D
It looks like his fans were asking where the pugs have gone before the critics did..so are the fans petty too? If your lifestyle is not compatible with dog ownership - or if you buy pets for any other reason other than well thought out, life long devotion to them, you shouldn't buy pets..and you certainly shouldn't be scoring Brownie points by getting them from high profile charities IMO.
The pettiness of his critics? Oh dear.
Surely, even as a fan, you can see why people might be wondering where they've disappeared to without it being solely a 'picking on Pete' exercise?
I wouldn't say it was a catastrophe, he started interviewing him and was told by someone off-camera to stop, then he had to wait a few seconds. He's warm & personable, hardly catastrophic:rolleyes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mgL1lORNuE
It's fair enough to ask where they are but it's a big jump to accuse him of only getting them as a PR exercise and as for attacking him for supporting Battersea Dogs Home
I quite agree owners who work away from home should think very carefully before taking on a pet but I expect that he would be required to detail the arrangements he was making for their care with Battersea and they wouldn't have allowed him to take on a dog unless they were fully satisfied.
You're quite right I shouldn't have allowed my impressions of other posters to slip out - I usually try my level best not to. Bad Sam!
Good. I'll try not let my impressions of some of his fans' inability to see posters as individuals and instead lump them all, childishly, together as one big biased Anti-Pete army, whose opinions can therefore all be written off as illogical dislike, affect my future posting. :cool:
Which reminds me, were you not the person asking on here for others NOT to do exactly that? And to treat posters as individuals and not paint them all with the same brush? I think you were. One rule for you then, Sensei?
He probably just wanted to have a dog and potential owners are anyway vetted by Battersea Dogs Home. Some will say it is to get brownie points, others will see it positively and say it raises awareness of the possibility of giving a home to a homeless dog rather than getting one from a breeder - which view you take depends on how you see Pete.
Anyway, it seems he does still have the dogs - both have twitter accounts, he says on his website that he has two pugs. If they had been given away, someone would surely come forward at some point. I don't see what more he can do or why he should.
As for having them on the show, maybe they don't like it. I am sure he makes arrangements for them when he goes away - Battersea will have anyway asked him about this before entrusting him with a dog.
On the other hand, I don't think people should get dogs or any animal if they are not prepared to commit themselves for the lifetime of their pets, 15 1/2 years in the case of my previous dog. They do not realise the psychological life-long damage that can be caused by casting aside an unwanted dog.
I'm quite happy for my overall posting history to speak for itself Lexi, you're not exactly consistent yourself
Why? Because I sometimes defend Pete?
I have no probs with you, you're a very reasonable and balanced poster, I just don't understand why sometimes you seem to find it difficult to separate the wheat (valid criticism) from the chaff (anti-Pete ranting) where PA is concerned.
If Pete's pugs are intelligent enough to tweet :rolleyes:, maybe they've engaged a solicitor to safeguard their privacy and have them removed from any filming.
You mean on This Morning - I thought he did it well. Sympathetic with the patients, letting them do most of the talking, and asking the doctor questions about the new techniques and machines, who also did most of the talking. I am not sure where he was 'patronising or cringey'
I agree Liz. He did well, and the section was very informative .
He did do well, peter was not "patronising or cringey". The more information that is given, can and will help many.
Cringey is normally the word I would use to describe PA & I only saw the second half of this but he actually surprised me, I thought he came over not too bad at all.
Though a caller at the end did have to spoil the moment by reminding us "how much he loved his family".
I agree with Liz that he let the patients and experts do most of the talking and it was an informative piece.
Nice to know that you have that special feeling too Daisy. :cool: You get what I mean.