George David and Marie Douglas-David are at war
Artist's rendition of "marie" (or is it a photograph?)
The countess divorce continues to snare its share of the headlines. My previous take on the struggle garnered the following response from a reader by the name of “sheri” on March 23, 2009 at 9:58 a.m. (Thank you for reading our payday loan blog, sheri!) Here it is, with her comments in bold and mine in italics:
“Get the facts buddy.”
OK. So you want me to take your word for it that you’re privy to inside information? Establish some credibility to allay my doubts… then we’ll talk about whether I’m your “buddy.”
“He (the filthy rich George David) bullied, coerced and threatened her into the POST-nup agreement. Then HE had her quit her job so that she could be with him when he traveled for business ect.” (sic)
Great. Now make me believe you. Show me corroborating evidence or sources.
“HE filed for divorce and she went to Sweden and had a weekend affair. HE had been having affairs with multiple women at that point and puts his mistress up in his Avon home.”
Again, simply because you say so does not persuade me. I don’t pretend to be an insider, but I do utilize multiple sources for information. Since you have called me out, the onus is on you, sheri, to tell me WHY I’m wrong.
“HE was angry with her when she had a miscarriage and wouldn’t visit her, BECAUSE HE was busy with his mistress.”
Sounds like that would be terrible behavior. But again, show me something.
“HE gifted her with those jewels, but they aren’t hers, they are in his name so he could cheat on taxes.”
If this is true, so what if he cheated on his taxes? There are much more serious issues in play here, as there are in the world at large… and besides, the IRS isn’t even a government agency and is illegal (see http://www.christianparty.net/irs.htm).
“Shall I continue? You sexist jerk.”
sheri, if that’s all you can offer, please don’t continue. If you want to have a dialogue, I welcome it… but let’s avoid name calling. It is sexist on your part to assume that because I am a man and take a position that questions Marie Douglas-David’s motives in reneging on a legal agreement that – so far as I have seen was not forced upon her via any of the means you allege – that I am a “sexist jerk.” That tends to deflate any credibility you hope to establish here.
Prove me wrong, sheri. Then CLICK HERE to continue reading this article.
Related Videos:
“Sexist Jerk” – Ok, let us examine something for a moment. The charge of “sexist jerk” seems to be leveled at someone who took the side of the husband in a divorce, and there is some reason to it. Now, automatically, the author is sexist because he didn’t automatically side with the wife? I can assure many people out there that in divorces, it is quite often both parties that contributed to the end of the marriage. Granted, there are certainly cases where it is the husbands’ fault, of course. However, are there not also instances where it also the woman’s fault? Perhaps we should not pay any attention to celebrity divorces and keep our minds on our own concerns.
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Joannah