Let's talk about Amal - Share opinions

Lorna? Lorna?

Any chance you could wave your magic wand again?

melbert wrote:

Donnamarie wrote:
SideEyeSally I think the dress Amal is wearing is very flowy and is just laying a certain way that makes her look fuller up front.  When you see her in the gold dress from the launch she isn't showing any weight gain through her front.

Just her panties...

Every body say Amal would never to do this like Sarah and Stacy.Then she do it.From back the white panties are very showing.
Now too Amal have panties shots all over web.Some say it must be deliberately otherwise she to wear nude colour,but WHITE!
Dress was not right for lawyer too shor but the panties can only be for attention?  If she just having fun with fashion, this not good for her profession world.Make Amal fans feel foolis.

In neither of those dresses can you see her panties, the light dress at dinner had a nude slip made into it. The gold dress is looks different in each picture.

annemarie wrote:In neither of those dresses can you see her panties, the light dress at dinner had a nude slip made into it. The gold dress is looks different in each picture.

Annemarie, yes in gold dress panties very seen by everyone.I did not say day before nighty dress was nighty dress not like gold and black dress complete see through, true you can see in picture.But in Ibiza Amal dress being so see through is all talk.My sister is there.Also worse from back than front.Really look close you see and label of dress.I know it upset me too.

George effect, all girls end up same.Panties on internet and skirts too short.

annemarie the McCartney dress does have a nude panel.  Nothing of Amal's undergarments are showing.  Unfortunately her underwear is showing under the gold dress.  I do not think she had any idea this was the case.  She has worn this dress before but as far as we know not at a public outing.  There were lots of bright lights and photographers taking pictures of her.  And sadly you can see her panties through her dress.  You can even seen the dress tag through the front in one photo.  I had no idea the dress was sheer enough to see through.  But bright lights can make all the difference.

Why in the world would Amal want her panties to show on purpose? That ridiculous. Yes she probably should have worn a nude color (maybe a bodysuit) if she was AWARE of a problem.  I don't think she realized it.  But if she finds out about this hopefully she will be careful in the future when dressing for bright lights in sheer fabrics.

annemarie wrote:In neither of those dresses can you see her panties, the light dress at dinner had a nude slip made into it. The gold dress is looks different in each picture.

I didn't notice the white panties but since it has been mentioned on several places online I decided to take a good look myself. In the gold dress I can see white panties. Take a look at the first pic on this link: (Amal's style blog)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This seems like a strange mistake. But this was a dress she had before George and maybee she decided to put it on in the last minute in Ibiza and not realizing that the panties would show.

White panties under black at back dress?

O.k now I see it I don't think she realized the dress was see through, she wore it on New years eve in a private setting so no bright lights. 

I don't think she wanted her underwear to show that is ridiculous.

All the women in George's life have been grown and have worn what they liked . Some dressed to make money or rather undressed Amal's dress went see through because of the lighting she chose the wrong color panties under the dress it happens.

I'm just going to say this and no more about it.

I think that it is highly unlikely to impossible that a woman who loves fashion and is photographed constantly, who has high-end designers as friends and 'business' associates, and who has a husband whose livelihood involves lights and cameras, didn't know that white panties under a sheer gold front and black back wouldn't show. Or that nobody told her before the event.

Take that for whatever you will.

Looks like a fun party.

.......... so Way2 are you saying Amal deliberately wore white panties so they would show through her dress?
Or was she just being careless?

Well, in the greater scheme of things, how much does it matter? 

It wasn't a G-string, and she's being consistent - white bra or vest under the Stella knitwear thingy as at other times.

Looks like everyone went home at about three in the morning.......

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

True pan at least she wears under wear and it was appropriate under wear. It doesn't matter things happen they all had a good time i'm sure . Amal will live and learn and carry on with her life after panty gate.

party animal - not! wrote:Well, in the greater scheme of things, how much does it matter? 

It wasn't a G-string, and she's being consistent - white bra or vest under the Stella knitwear thingy as at other times.

Looks like everyone went home at about three in the morning.......

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From the back semi G-string.Very visable to all.Including Amal.

"Panty gate".  LOL annemarie.  It's just one of those things.  We certainly don't know why it got past Amal. Other than she may have never worn this piece where there would be lots of bright lights with cameras everywhere.  I'm going with that scenario.  

There is no way I'm willing to believe most women  would deliberately want their panties to show through their clothing.  Just like what happened to Stacy a few years ago.  I never thought it was anything more than an oversight on her part.  And thought she handled it quite well.

Thanks for that zoom of George beautiful face !!! 

Donnamarie, I agree it was simply bad choice of underwear, George probably didn't notice if he is like most husbands he is rushing her to hurry up lol. Yep stacy's boob tape was big non news as well.

hathaross wrote:Thanks for that zoom of George beautiful face !!! 

Me too! I love that he arrived at the party and his hair is nicely brushed but by the end of the evening it's all mussy! He was having way too much fun!

Guys this is the wrong thread to talk about Amal panties. This is already a subject in the other Ibiza thread. Thanks

photo credit : http://www.gettyimages.com/photos/amal-clooney?excludenudity=false&family=editorial&phrase=amal%20clooney&sort=best

ZOOM!!!!!!!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You're an idiot troll.  

Sorry Nicky.

Maybe we should start a "Panty Gate" thread.

....... just kidding.

Donnamarie wrote:
There is no way I'm willing to believe most women  would deliberately want their panties to show through their clothing.  Just like what happened to Stacy a few years ago.  I never thought it was anything more than an oversight on her part.  And thought she handled it quite well.

Used to be when I was young you did not want to have your bra strap showing.  Now my teen daughters have theirs showing most of the summer.  Also used to be men didn't want their underwear showing and now boys show it on purpose.  Who knows what some folks consider acceptable/ fashionable regarding undergarments.

At least she was wearing panties!

Doubt she is pregnant either with the number of drinks she is pictured with.

Donnamarie wrote:.......... so Way2 are you saying Amal deliberately wore white panties so they would show through her dress?
Or was she just being careless?

Is there a difference?

Way2Old4Dis wrote:

Donnamarie wrote:.......... so Way2 are you saying Amal deliberately wore white panties so they would show through her dress?
Or was she just being careless?

Is there a difference?

Yes. Absolutely.

Donnamarie wrote:

Way2Old4Dis wrote:

Donnamarie wrote:.......... so Way2 are you saying Amal deliberately wore white panties so they would show through her dress?
Or was she just being careless?

Is there a difference?

Yes. Absolutely.

If she was "careless" then she would not care or not if her panties showed.

just looks like a beach cover-up with a bikini underneath

Okay, try it this way.

Put yourself into this scenario.

You are a bright woman who is known for both your professional decorum and your fashion sense. You are photographed constantly. You are, if reports are to be believed, staying in a 12-bedroom villa that probably has an ample number of mirrors, and you are in one of the world's party cities, where bright lights are the norm.

What's more, your companions are (1) your husband, who makes his living under, in front of, and behind the lights and cameras; (2) one of the top supermodels ever, who still gets photographed wherever she goes, and who is now reportedly your good friend; and (3) the supermodel's husband, your husband's best friend, who is no stranger to the party scene, having made quite a living on them one way or another.

Now, tell me how you go out not knowing that your undies are or will be quite visible under your dress.

Don't get me wrong. I don't care about the woman's lingerie choice. But let's not pretend that it was a lapse or mistake that left her regretful or mortified, or that it's something she has to get over or move on from. A choice was made here. She had her reasons. So I don't see any call for making excuses on Amal's behalf.

BTW, hm21, I was not responding to you personally. It just took me a while to get the post done on the Kindle.

It's a generic "you" and "your." And I'm really done talking about another woman's panties.

Wow. I am pretty floored by how quick we are to judge.

I can't help but put myself in her shoes. I would like to think that most people would pause to think about how they would feel about such judgments if the shoe was on the other foot.

This is the person after all that someone sees fit to attempt (sadly) to ridicule with ridiculous Photoshop effects and very very nasty personal attacks. I would go so far as to label it racist but for the fact that it these efforts are so wacko that they defy classification. 

The choices seem to be something like this - stupid, careless, classless   or human.

Am I ridiculous to suggest that I find it strange that in place where people are such devoted fans of George that they would not have more respect for his wife.

Yup. I'm ridiculous.

Well, if it was me then I'd have a dilemma about the underwear if I liked the dress that much that I wanted to wear it to this bunfight. 

Black wouldn't work - and flesh colour would look as if I had no underwear on at all! Don't think Amal's losing any sleep about it though! Better things to do............

She simply chose the wrong panties in a lot of those pictures you can't even see the panties so I believe she really had no idea they would even show.

party animal - not! wrote:Well, if it was me then I'd have a dilemma about the underwear if I liked the dress that much that I wanted to wear it to this bunfight. 

Black wouldn't work - and flesh colour would look as if I had no underwear on at all! Don't think Amal's losing any sleep about it though! Better things to do............

Yes like cuddle up to that handsome husband of hers.

hm21 actually explained  this oops quite well.  And that's what I meant by "careless". It was a mindless oversight.   I am sure the lights in a house or in a restaurant are not the same as what Amal faced at the party.  If it was obvious don't you think her husband, Cindy or anyone else with her before they left would have said something?

It is absolutely and unequivocally ridiculous to think she would purposely go out with her panties showing through her dress.  Makes no sense.  Unless of course you think she is desperate for attention.  And that's what I take away from some of the comments here.  I think hm21 used the word "ludicrous". Yes! Yes! Yes!

And Way2 we have no idea how she felt after realizing what happened.

Actually lets not pretend that there are posters here who just don't like Amal and without saying as much will criticize her at every turn. Even if the criticism makes no sense.

One more comment on "Panty Gate".  When she was with her parents (without George) in NYC, her panties were seen through her dress.

oldweston wrote:

This is the person after all that someone sees fit to attempt (sadly) to ridicule with ridiculous Photoshop effects and very very nasty personal attacks. I would go so far as to label it racist but for the fact that it these efforts are so wacko that they defy classification. 

No Need to bring the racist flag up. Everyone has different opinions and if you don't like some this is ok but don't overreact. In case i missed it please show to me the racist comment which was made here and I take care of it. I haven't seen it.

Donnamarie wrote:

Actually lets not pretend that there are posters here who just don't like Amal and without saying as much will criticize her at every turn.   Even if the criticism makes no sense.

Some are always positve about her some are always negative about and some are sometimes negative or positve about her. that's the good thing about this Forum to exchange this opinion with everyone here.



I will refuse to talk about Amal panties. But let me know when we see George panties and I'm on board

Nicky said:
Some are always positve about her some are always negative about and some are sometimes negative or positve about her. that's the good thing about this Forum to exchange this opinion with everyone here.

I guess I belong to the third category. I thought the golden dress with the blacks pumps looked sleazy. But I  didn't notice the white panties until I saw it mentioned on several online sites. I don't think she knew the panties would show, why would she want her panties to show?


And Nicky, I don't want to see George's panties. I hope he wears boxers. 

@Jenn, hm21, party-animal--not, old weston, annemarie, donnamarie,  - 
 
Photos on Getty Images are often retouched & edited. It states so on their website.


So they can be sold. All you have to do is zoom in to see. Pixels. The ones I found on another site have an app which allows you to see the original. Even heavy duty contouring make-up.  
I understand you're so enthused to prove otherwise. Either way, not an attractive result.   But it's her outstanding human rights career that is what is so "fascinating."  Her self-sacrificial fight to save the underprivileged. That's what appealed to George Clooney in no time, was what was pitched in the press releases.
  Makes it oh so credible to the masses. 
....

Perhaps there are professional reps posting here too, promoting Amal Allahmuddin and they take great offence in anyone disagreeing with any media released fawning over-saturation. 
Almost comes across as desperate damage control.  
People must be laughing reading the gross-exaggeration parody. Hope it doesn't damage George Clooney's public image....by association.  

The photos you provided from Getty Images are heavily softened and retouched. Zoom in. I have no desire to alter the photos other than bring them to their original form, as an example. What George sees.  

I'm not Salvador Dali with his fascination of quirky, grotesque or distorted imagery.

party animal - not! wrote:and flesh colour would look as if I had no underwear on at all! 

   Actually, Joanna, nude/ flesh color would have been appropriate. It wouldn't stand out at all. Blends in & makes garment seem not transparent.    Guess she's not very elegant. 

Really!  Bright white briefs on olive skin under gold lame?  Tacky.  

The point, however, is an almost 40 year old woman who has been incessantly photographed for a year & a half, representing the public image of a renowned celebrity as a "reality star companion" should have taken precautions at such a public event as this Casamigos launch.    And to think her mother Baria Alamuddin owns a PR company specialising in celebrity events & relationships in London!  
 
It only undermines George Clooney by associating him with trashy tactlessness.   So much for public image restructure.   

I do recall Amal Alamuddin said that she's simply  "tried Casamigos", scrunching her nose, when a reporter asked her if she liked Casamigos in  front of George Clooney, at the Golden Globes this year.  Not very supporting as a "wife."     

Well, enough of that. There's another tax deduction & a launch of a niche brand of tequila.

She said she tried it which was her honest answer not every one even a wife has to like every thing.

Surfing what you say about amal actually says more about you than her.

No , you cannot see her panties   in the white dress the lining of the dress is short and you can see a little leg. That dress is in style sheer with a lining.

OK Annemarie, whatever you say...

annemarie - I didn't examine the pictures that carefully, but you can clearly see her panties through the gold dress. I'm guessing she didn't realize it before she left the hotel and once she did know, she probably didn't care. There was nothing she could do about it anyway, unless she wanted to take them off. Either way, she can't win.

LizzyNY wrote:annemarie - I didn't examine the pictures that carefully, but you can clearly see her panties through the gold dress. I'm guessing she didn't realize it before she left the hotel and once she did know, she probably didn't care. There was nothing she could do about it anyway, unless she wanted to take them off. Either way, she can't win.

You are right LizzyNy she can't win mistakes happen, but with Amal clooney she is damned for being human.

Nicky

I was disturbed about the posting of the caricature on the Es Torrent thread. I have been equally disturbed by  much of "commentary" from this individual. Much of it is just completely ridiculous and disturbed - and I get that.

The purpose of the image was unambiguous - disparaging and ridiculing an individual or group on the basis of immutable characteristics is hate speech. This is not the first time I have reached the same conclusion with respect to vicious "commentary" from one poster with many online identities. 

I appreciate your comment completely. I do not use such terms lightly - I absolutely don't mind being offended  I have no issue with opinion and disagreements. I certainly regret posting when I clearly, on the more general topic, had left my sense of humour at the door. I will say however that in my opinion the "commentary" of this one poster goes way over the line.

@annemarie - likewise, I believe your comments really do show a desperate push to enforce your opinion...& persuade. Almost like an agenda.  

@oldweston - superfluous pomposity affectation    but if you're really from Canada, as per your username's location, you most certainly don't spell like a Canadian.  I wonder how many usernames you have. I joined in March & only started posting recently, as you can see. 
Accusing me of being others can be reciprocated as me pondering if you're a hired PR rep or a shill.  Or if you, Sylvia Cheevers, party animal-not!, Joanna, One Eyed Sally, hebe, etc, are the same person.  According to comments on other sites.
   Or are you with Globelle Communications celebrity publicity firm?  

The photo of Gonzo is a decorative tribute like an emoticon. Gonzo is admiring Cindy Crawford, is the meaning. Relax! 
This excessive desperation to make this fansite a one-sided appraisal worshipping of Amal Alamuddin is ridiculous.  She was a, plain, unknown, junior lawyer clerking,  until George Clooney agreed to publicly promote her.  Without the Clooney name, this "professional" barrister is really another unknown person. Not a celebrity, as Baria Alamuddin professed so exubarantly "we are now famous."  
This site is not a shrine to yet another notch in George's public image.. (not his belt, in this case...)

Yes annemarie, I couldn't agree with you more.

And everyone makes fashion mistakes. We all do. And Amal is no exception.

Nicky is going to get really mad at us if we don't stop talking Panty Gate here.

Okay. I give.

My self-imposed moratorium on Amal comments, even in its brevity, was a respite from a troubling trend here, and I should have taken it as a clue.

It is obvious that the faction here that is so taken with Amal that they jump to her defense EVEN WHEN THE POINT BEING MADE WAS THAT SHE DID NOT NEED A DEFENSE will not tolerate any comment that does not praise, or at least excuse, her every action. When even a non-judgement is used as evidence of a personal indictment against her, and the entire focus of comments is either purposely twisted or willfully ignored, then it's time for me to go. There's no other way out of this tunnel-visioned PC trap this forum has fallen into.

I will be keeping my account for the use of PMs with members, but it's no longer possible to be honest or objective or funny here without the hassle of an extended and pointless debate with certain members, so this forum is over for me. It's supposed to be enjoyable. It no longer is. So I'm done.

Sorry Nicky I'll behave .

Surfing makes unfounded and malicious statements here. She/he does go way over the line in her/his rhetoric. And personally I think Surfing's comments should be banned.

If I get in trouble for saying as much so be it.