A Chill Wind is Blowing

[Masklinn]

Very nice speech ! *Applause*

I always liked Tim Robbins in his films, I knew he couldn't be a bad guy. [img]smile.gif[/img]

And what you guys fail to understand is that by not "inviting a star to a party" (©LilLil) because of his politic views and positions, you CLEARLY send a message to other ones saying : "If you open your mouth, expect the same thing". That's where freedom of speech starts to die.

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Masklinn: Very nice speech ! *Applause* I always liked Tim Robbins in his films, I knew he couldn't be a bad guy. [img]smile.gif[/img] And what you guys fail to understand is that by not "inviting a star to a party" (©LilLil) because of his politic views and positions, you CLEARLY send a message to other ones saying : "If you open your mouth, expect the same thing". That's where freedom of speech starts to die.

I disagree, the message it sends is "if you plan to be an activist, expect to be treated like one". No organization is under the obligation to provide a podium for activists to communicate their position. Doing this is tantamount to supporting their position unless you have an opposing view expressed at the same time. The safe road for any non-political organization is to avoid any association with activists of ANY side.

Freedom dies when people and organizations are FORCED to do something because someone else thinks they should. Cooperstown was free to uninvite Tim, Tim is free to complain about it. You're free to support him, and I'm free to support Cooperstown.

If you force Cooperstown to accept Tim... how is that improving freedom?

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Thoran: Quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: This thread: http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/noncgi/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000614# 000000 Contains two examples. I can find you many more.

That same thread contains examples on the other side also. As I said above you'll always get the fringe groups, people willing to use violence to emphasize their position. This however is a far cry from government sponsored censorship and one side persecution of the anti-war activists... which does not appear to be happening.[/QUOTE]If you say so.

I was wondering though, could you kindly point me to examples of death threats vs pro-war people, or examples of anti-war people trying to run down pro-war people protesting on the sidewalk? Or maybe some examples of anti-war media celebrities advocating people go down and intimidate a pro-war rally. How about examples of anti-war spokespeople initiating a letter writing campaign to get pro-war persons employer telling them to fire the pro-war columnist?

I didn't think so.

The rhetoric is much more violent and threatening from pro-war side then anything I have seen from the anti-war side

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by pritchke: I know, I know another actor whose voice isn't worth anything, but he does bring up some great points on what is happening to and in the US. It so happens that I agree with him.... except for his love of baseball. Way to go for speaking out against the Bush regime.

Nobody has said his voice (or the voice of any other actors/actresses) "isn't worth anything". What we have said is that it isn't worth ANY MORE than Joe Average Citizen. One of the most interesting statements Robbins made was Our ability to disagree, and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are. I agree completely, but it seems Robbins and Sarandon are the ones who are upset about people "disagreeing" with them. He lists several examples of he and Susan being told or indirectly informed that they (and their views) aren't welcome in a particular venue. They claim this is a violation of the First Amendment rights. BZZZZZZZZZZZZ! Wrong answer, Mr. Robbins...but thank you for playing. If his First Amendment rights were truly being violated, he wouldn't have been able to give this interview. He would not be able to express his views on TV or any other public appearance he makes. There would be armed guards standing there ensuring he didn't utter these "traitorous" words. That hasn't happened. The First Amendment ONLY states that the government cannot place restrictions on an individual's right to free speech. Individual businesses and venues - however - DO NOT have to abide by the standards. It was pointed out in the Sounds of Silence thread that celebrities DO have a right to voice their opinions..but the general public is under NO obligation to listen to them.

Robbins talks about "our right to disagree" defining who we are...but he does not practice what he preaches. All of the incidents he described were recounted to him at a recent family reunion. Judging from his comments, EVERYONE at the reunion was anti-war - so where was the disagreement? The same is true for many other Hollywood celebs. They talk among themselves about these "world topics"...but they only talk to those that agree with them. When one of their own disagrees or supports a conservative POV on a given issue, they will quickly find themselves "blackballed" by the "in crowd". And I think this is one of the biggest problems these celebs face. They aren't really willing to hear a dissenting view themselves. They think they are right and everyone should agree with them. They would be well served to spend some time on Ironworks or a similar forum where they actually have to respond to opposing views and offer legitimate counter-arguments, rather than just claiming their First Amendment rights are being violated when they meet with disagreement.

{deep cleansing breath]OK.....now that I got THAT off my chest, I will agree that Robbins DID raise several good points. The unity we felt as a nation after the 9/11 attack was truly a sight to behold. To see our congressmen actually put aside their partisan labels (at least temporarily) and to stand united under the more encompassing label of "American" was awe-inspiring indeed. I also had great hope for our nation to become closer as a nation and to move away from the divisive labels we have adopted to reflect our various viewpoints. But, alas, it did not occur. [img]graemlins/verysad.gif[/img] It was only a matter of time before the infighting and name-calling returned to Capitol Hill. Both sides share an equal amount of blame as they exaggerated their claims of the potential consequences that would result from allowing their political opponents viewpoint to be followed. Although I fully support him, I also have to lay a large portion of the blame on President Bush. Diplomacy is NOT his strong point. Pritchke mentioned the change in "international attitude" towards the U.S. and states how it has moved from overwhelming support and sympathy after 9/11 to fear, anger, and distrust by many nations now. Americans (myself included) don't like to hear such claims, but facts are facts. Whether this "international attitude" is justified or not doesn't really matter. What does matter is the fact that it DOES exist (whether we admit it or not), and it IS an issue we (as a nation) should address.

I also agree that Robbins had several other good points - and some of the incidents he mentioned (if true) definitely should have never happened. I think this is the true legacy of the America - is that each of us ARE allowed to express our individual opinions and that we would ALL benefit from listening to opposing views - because none of us are 100% right all of the time.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Masklinn: Very nice speech ! *Applause* I always liked Tim Robbins in his films, I knew he couldn't be a bad guy. [img]smile.gif[/img] And what you guys fail to understand is that by not "inviting a star to a party" (©LilLil) because of his politic views and positions, you CLEARLY send a message to other ones saying : "If you open your mouth, expect the same thing". That's where freedom of speech starts to die.

HEY MASKLINN!!!! It's good to "see" you again. I heard that you had been "ethnically cleansed". [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img] I'm very pleased to see the circumstances of your demise were greatly exaggerated. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

Thoran already addressed your last comment. I would just add that - for every venue that "uninvites" Robbins, Sarandon, or any other anti-war celeb - there is obviously another venue that will extend an invitation to them. Again, if Robbins' First Amendment rights were truly being compromised, he would not have been able to give this speech at all.

[Mordenheim]

AS I read that joke I could only think of one thing...

He and Susan (and the rest) want attention soooooooooooo bad

[Timber Loftis]

Good speech. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] It's not anti-war, but anti-oppression of free speech, and who can disagree with that? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] We cannot let ourselves go down McCarthy's road.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Mordenheim: AS I read that joke I could only think of one thing... He and Susan (and the rest) want attention soooooooooooo bad

No one wants the kind of attention he's dealing with. His hollywood opportunities will be worse after his speaking out than before. I mean, these are two A-listers for Crissake - they can have all the attention they want.

[Mordenheim]

You know what TL with all due respect. You don't (and I) know what he want's and does not.

"Stars" are very good at drama. They excel at it and use it at every chance. Next he will call himself Ghandi and claim to have been shot at.

People have every right to not invite him to a party. They can cancel if they so choose. People can be conscious of who they fund and who they do not. What is so sad is how a select few that DISLIKE (at best) this government anyway are crying for the spotlight. Why am I shocked? that is what stars do.

People all across America had wives/husbands/children/parents in Iraq fighting. The same exact time his wife is insulting their commander and chief in every way possible. She has every right to do that. People have every right to view her anyway they so choose.

Hollywood has it's own idea of "life" and EXPECT people to listen up when they speak. The fact is no other group is so far out of touch or hypocritical at the same time. They seem to think that acting grants the +3 to intel and +4 to wisdom. Well it don't.

But here is where it REALLY get's me. Hollywood is one of the most discriminating places in America. Say you are a republican and see how many parties, event's you get invited to. Heck just see how many roles get thrown you're way. The same exact phony group in a place we call "tinsel" town is crying about discrimination! It don't get better then that. They have been discriminating for decades! How about Mel Gibson? After he decided to make a movie about Jesus he was harrased! He called it a "career killer". Some tolerance. That is why this is a huge joke.

They have no respect. I mean they don't even follow up one their own BS. Baldwin why are you still here?

[Mordenheim]

Oh and McCarthy implies goverment. I have not seen one shred of evidence that the goverment has stopped any Hollywood star from speaking even though they nailed Bush to a cross. Using that name is a red herring at best