From behind the bar at "Cheers"...

[Guest Frank Zappa Mask]

I'm an American tired of American lies

 

Woody Harrelson

Thursday October 17, 2002

The Guardian

 

The man who drives me to and from work is named Woody too. A relief to me, as it minimises the chance of my forgetting his name. I call him Woodman and he calls me Wood. He has become my best friend here, even though he's upset that I have quit drinking beer. He's smart, funny, and there's nothing he hasn't seen in 33 years behind the wheel of his black cab. He drove me for a while before I felt confident he liked me; he doesn't like people easily, especially if they have a rap for busting up black cabs.

Woodman and I agree about a lot of things, but one thing we can never agree about is Iraq. He thinks the only language Saddam understands is brute force. I don't believe we should be bombing cities in our quest for one man. We've killed a million Iraqis since the start of the Gulf war - mostly by blocking humanitarian aid. Let's stop now. Thankfully, most of the Brits I talk to about the war are closer to me than to Woodman. Only your prime minister doesn't seem to have noticed.

 

I have been here three months doing a play in the West End. I am having the time of my life. I love England, the people, the parks, the theatre. The play is great and the audiences have been a dream. Probably I should just relax, be happy and talk about the weather, but this war is under my skin - it affects my sleep.

 

I remember playing basketball with an Iraqi in the late 80s while Iran and Iraq were at war. I didn't know at the time that the US and Britain were supplying weapons to both sides. I asked why they were always at war with each other and he said something that stayed with me: "If it were up to the people, there would be peace. It's the governments that create war." And now my government is creating its second war in less than a year. No; war requires two combatants, so I should say "its second bombing campaign".

 

I went to the White House when Harvey Weinstein was showing Clinton the movie Welcome to Sarejevo, which I was in. I got a few moments alone with Clinton. Saddam throwing out the weapons inspectors was all over the news and I asked what he was going to do. His answer was very revealing. He said: "Everybody is telling me to bomb him. All the military are saying, 'You gotta bomb him.' But if even one innocent person died, I couldn't bear it." And I looked in his eyes and I believed him. Little did I know he was blocking humanitarian aid at the time, allowing the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

 

I am a father, and no amount of propaganda can convince me that half a million dead children is acceptable "collateral damage". The fact is that Saddam Hussein was our boy. The CIA helped him to power, as they did the Shah of Iran and Noriega and Marcos and the Taliban and countless other brutal tyrants. The fact is that George Bush Sr continued to supply nerve gas and technology to Saddam even after he used it on Iran and then the Kurds in Iraq. While the Amnesty International report listing countless Saddam atrocities, including gassing and torturing Kurds, was sitting on his desk, Bush Sr pushed through a $2bn "agricultural" loan and Thatcher gave hundreds of millions in export credit to Saddam. The elder Bush then had the audacity to quote the Amnesty reports to garner support for his oil war.

 

A decade later, Shrub follows the same line: "We have no quarrel with the Iraqi people." I'm sure half a million Iraqi parents are scratching their heads over that. I'm an American tired of lies. And with our government, it's mostly lies.

 

The history taught in our schools is scandalous. We grew up believing that Columbus actually discovered America. We still celebrate Columbus Day. Columbus was after one thing only - gold. As the natives were showering him with gifts and kindness, he wrote in his diary, "They do not bear arms ... They have no iron ... With 50 men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want." Columbus is the perfect symbol of US foreign policy to this day.

 

This is a racist and imperialist war. The warmongers who stole the White House (you call them "hawks", but I would never disparage such a fine bird) have hijacked a nation's grief and turned it into a perpetual war on any non-white country they choose to describe as terrorist.

 

To the men in Washington, the world is just a giant Monopoly board. Oddly enough, Americans generally know how the government works. The politicians do everything they can for the people - the people who put them in power. The giant industries that are polluting our planet as well as violating human rights worldwide are the ones nearest and dearest to the hearts of American politicians.

 

But in wartime people lose their senses. There are flags and yellow ribbons and posters and every media outlet is beating the war drum and even sensible people can hear nothing else. In the US, God forbid you should suggest the war is unjust or that dropping cluster bombs from 30,000ft on a city is a cowardly act. When TV satirist Bill Maher made some dissenting remarks about the bombing of Afghanistan, Disney pulled the plug on him. In a country that lauds its freedom of speech, a word of dissent can cost you your job.

 

I read in a paper here about a woman who held out the part of her taxes that would go to the war effort. Something like 17%. I like that idea, though in the US it would have to be more like 50%. If you consider money as a form of energy, then we see half our taxes and half the US government's energy focused on war and weapons of mass destruction. Over the past 30 years, this amounts to more than ten trillion dollars. Imagine that money going to preserving rainforest or contributing to a sustainable economy (as opposed to the dinosaur tit we are currently in the process of sucking dry).

 

I give in to Woodman, and we stop for a few beers. He asks me what I'd do in Bush's shoes. Easy: I'd honour Kyoto. Join the world court. I'd stop subsidising earth rapers like Monsanto, Dupont and Exxon. I'd shut down the nuclear power plants. So I already have $200bn saved from corporate welfare. I'd save another $100bn by stopping the war on non-corporate drugs. And I'd cut the defence budget in half so they'd have to get by on a measly $200bn a year. I've already saved half a trillion bucks by saying no to polluters and warmongers.

 

Then I'd give $300bn back to the taxpayers. I'd take the rest and pay the people teaching our children what they deserve. I'd put $100bn into alternative fuels and renewable energy. I'd revive the Chemurgy movement, which made the farmer the root of the economy, and make paper and fuel from wheat straw, rice straw and hemp. Not only would I attend, I'd sponsor the next Earth Summit. And, of course, I'd give myself a fat raise.

 

Woodman drops me at home and I ask if he likes my ideas. He offers a reluctant "yes". As he pulls away he yells out, "But I'd never vote for a man who can't handle a few pints at the end of the day!"

 

· Woody Harrelson appears in On an Average Day at the Comedy Theatre, Panton Street, London SW1 until November 3. Box office: 020-7369 1731.

[Guest Mad Dog]

Who cares what some actor think. Just b/c he can read lines doesn't make his social commentary worth jack shit.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Good ol' Woody. I wish he'd stay in England. Or up in a tree with an unsturdy branch...

[Guest DrTom]

It's good of Mr Harrelson to provide the latest proof why actors should just read their lines, smile for the cameras, and shut the fuck up when it comes to any issue that doesn't affect their precious Hollywood. Now at least Ted Danson has some competition for the dubious distinction of being the stupidest person to graduate from "Cheers."

 

I don't believe we should be bombing cities in our quest for one man.

Which is, of course, not at all what we'd be doing in Iraq, nor is it what we did in Afghanistan. We drove the Taliban from power and crippled many Al'Qaeda training camps with our strikes and bombing campaigns. Removing Saddan Hussein, his worthless family, and the worthless religious leaders from power in Iraq doesn't take a lot of bombs.

 

We've killed a million Iraqis since the start of the Gulf war - mostly by blocking humanitarian aid.

What we've done is enforced the sanctions and regulations that Saddam Hussein agreed to after losing a war. I guess I shouldn't expect a potheaded actor to understand this, but it really is quite simple.

 

And now my government is creating its second war in less than a year.

Yeah. Your government lost 3000 people in a cowardly and senseless terrorist attack, you waste of sperm and egg. It really boggles my mind and angers me that so many people don't see that what we did in Afghanistan was in retaliation for the 3000 dead in NY and DC. Like a good (sym)pathetic liberal, though, Harrelson conveniently forgot about the American victims in his Holy Crusade against the US military.

 

And I looked in his eyes and I believed him [President Clinton].

That's enough reason right there to call Harrelson a hopeless cretin.

 

The fact is that Saddam Hussein was our boy. The CIA helped him to power, as they did the Shah of Iran and Noriega and Marcos and the Taliban and countless other brutal tyrants.

I love how people keep bringing things like this up. "But the US funded bin Laden when he was fighting against the Soviets!!" Yada yada yada. We've made mistakes in the past, there's blood on our hands for some of them, and we're certainly not perfect. However, we're right more often than we're wrong, we're right more often than anyone else on this earth, and being wrong in the past doesn't mean we can't do what's right now. I'd have more patience for the Left if 99% of them weren't so bloody thickheaded and downright stupid.

 

We grew up believing that Columbus actually discovered America.

That's probably because he did, at least as far as civilized Europe was concerned.

 

As the natives were showering him with gifts and kindness, he wrote in his diary, "They do not bear arms ... They have no iron ... With 50 men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want."

Considering that explorers at the time were sent out with specific instructions to see how existing countries and kingdoms could expand their empires, this is both unsurprising and unremarkable. It might even be untrue, but that really doesn't matter.

 

Columbus is the perfect symbol of US foreign policy to this day.

And Special Ed from "Crank Yankers" is the perfect symbol for actors trying to talk about politics. "I got activism! Yay!"

 

This is a racist and imperialist war.

It's neither, though it is commendable of Harrison to use two of the Left's favorite buzzwords in the same sentence. He's obviously read some of the "intellectuals" that side can boast. Of course, the war is neither of the things Harrelson claims it to be, but why let facts get in the way of an actor's ignorant beliefs?

 

... turned it into a perpetual war on any non-white country they choose to describe as terrorist.

Maybe because the "white" countries... (gasp!) don't practice despicable Islamic terrorism! The IRA has been a problem, but Al'Qaeda and Palestine are both worse. We haven't pigeonholed Arab men as terrorists; they've done it to themselves by committing acts of terrorism against the West over and over again.

 

To the men in Washington, the world is just a giant Monopoly board.

What a ridiculous, unjustifiable, and downright idiotic claim. Typical of an empty-headed Hollywood do-gooder. Maybe Peter Jennings should write a speech for Mr Harrelson, about the role of actors as activists. It worked so well when he did it for Barbra Streisand.

 

The giant industries that are polluting our planet as well as violating human rights worldwide are the ones nearest and dearest to the hearts of American politicians.

Well, I was wondering when we were going to get into the crap about pollution and how big corporations run everything. Again, it's quite nice of Harrelson to fit two idiotic liberal platforms into one sentence.

 

When TV satirist Bill Maher made some dissenting remarks about the bombing of Afghanistan, Disney pulled the plug on him.

Which is the fault of Disney, NOT the US government that Harrelson would like to implicate. The only censorship of Bill Maher was done by the network that aired his show. I don't agree with it, but it's not like Disney hasn't made a bunch of stupid decisions over the years.

 

If you consider money as a form of energy, then we see half our taxes and half the US government's energy focused on war and weapons of mass destruction.

That's not even close to being accurate, but if it keeps Harrelson warm at night while he burns the hemp ropes in the fireplace, more power to him.

 

I've already saved half a trillion bucks by saying no to polluters and warmongers.

Yeah, and you've cripped the US military, removed a viable source of power for everyone who depends on it, raped corporations acting within existing laws, signed a joke of a treaty even Japan hasn't signed, and made one good move (stopping the war on drugs) for a purely selfish reason. Good job. Typical liberal thinking at work there, kids. Study those "suggestions," and make sure never to vote for anyone myopic enough to seriously advocate them.

 

I'd revive the Chemurgy movement, which made the farmer the root of the economy, and make paper and fuel from wheat straw, rice straw and hemp.

Because we all know THAT would be a smashing idea...

 

And, of course, I'd give myself a fat raise.

Save your money, Mr Harrelson, and invest in a better, smarter political opinion. That way, the rest of us will be spared from reading this miserable tripe by someone who thinks he's qualified to speak on world affairs because he had a minor role in a successful TV show. At least Ted Danson was a star.

[Guest Frank Zappa Mask]

QUOTE

"And I looked in his eyes and I believed him [President Clinton]."

 

<<<That's enough reason right there to call Harrelson a hopeless cretin.>>>

 

Have to agree with this sentiment. Now, I could care less where Clinton put his privates, but not pardoning someone like Leonard Peltier while giving a free pass to his brother Roger and countless other floozies leaves a slime trail over everything he stands for...

[Guest DrTom]

RATM politics, Chris? I guess that's better than a cop killer.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Bill Maher was fired because he wasn't getting any ratings.

 

Harrels and his commie Hollywood friends can keep writing and saying all this crap. They look complete jerks to anyone with any common sense.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

RATM is also pro-Mumia, too. They've done concerts for that cop-killing pig who deserves to get sliced open.

 

(I'm assuming RATM is Rage Against The Machine...)

[Guest Ozymandias]

You folks sound silly saying he shouldn't say anything political because he's 'just an actor". Would he have more cred if he posted on a professional wrestling board?

 

If you all could get YOUR political opinions published you'd all do it as well.

[Guest DrTom]

You folks sound silly saying he shouldn't say anything political because he's 'just an actor".

It's not that being "just an actor" invalidates his opinion. It doesn't help him much, though, since a lot of people in Hollywood are oblivious to what really happens and what "ordinary" folks think, and think empty gestures mean a lot. Anyway, actors who try to speak as activists seem to be under the impression people should listen to them just because they're actors. In reality, the best they can hope to do is put a somewhat famous face and voice to their pet cause, and that's really where they should stop. When they get too deep into an issue, they just come off as uninformed mouthpieces for whatever their pet cause happens to be.

 

Also, I don't really care what Tom Selleck and Charlton Heston have to say, either. I'd tend to agree with them (except about the NRA) far more often than I would a liberal like Harrelson, but none of their opinions carry any special weight with me.

 

The best quote to give perspective on actors as credible activists was offered by an actor himself. Brad Pitt, after starring in Seven Years in Tibet, was asked a question about the politics in that part of the world. His answer? "Who cares what I think? I'm a fucking actor." Amen, Brad.

[Guest Ozymandias]

We've killed a million Iraqis since the start of the Gulf war - mostly by blocking humanitarian aid.

What we've done is enforced the sanctions and regulations that Saddam Hussein agreed to after losing a war.

 

 

So that makes a million dead Iraqi civilians acceptable? It's okay because their maniac President signed a sanction to save his own ass? That makes it right to deny people basic aid that they'll DIE without?

 

 

And now my government is creating its second war in less than a year.

Yeah.  Your government lost 3000 people in a cowardly and senseless terrorist attack, you waste of sperm and egg.  It really boggles my mind and angers me that so many people don't see that what we did in Afghanistan was in retaliation for the 3000 dead in NY and DC.  Like a good (sym)pathetic liberal, though, Harrelson conveniently forgot about the American victims in his Holy Crusade against the US military.

 

 

Oh for Christ's sake, just SHUT THE FUCK UP. Yes, 2700 people lost their lives in a horrible attack at the hands of lunatic fascists. It's a horrible, horrible thing and everybody here still feels terrible about it. But it's happened before. Masses of people die senseless deaths at the hands of fascists. It's fucking awful, but it happens. It's happened before and it'll happen again. Just because it happened to America for once doesn't make it the end of the world.

You sound like a fucking clown citing this as if it gives us the right to attack Iraq and Afghanistan and kill thousands (more than were killed on 9/11) of civilians in the process. If the US government wants to use the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to do something that might REALLY prevent future attacks (closing the fucking borders; cease getting involved in Mid-East disputes that don't concern us; etc.) than that is great. But more mass-muder isn't the answer.

Where the fuck do you get off implying that the guy doesn't care about all the lives lost on 9/11 just because he doesn't want to see more senseless deaths?

Maybe he didn't mention the attacks because, unlike yourself, he realizes that it has no place in a discussion of unleashing bombing campaigns on countries full of innocent people. Ya think?

 

 

And I looked in his eyes and I believed him [President Clinton].

That's enough reason right there to call Harrelson a hopeless cretin.

 

Hey, Clinton was a great liar and had a genuine knack for making people believe that he cared about someone other than himself. Give credit where it's due.

 

 

The fact is that Saddam Hussein was our boy. The CIA helped him to power, as they did the Shah of Iran and Noriega and Marcos and the Taliban and countless other brutal tyrants.

I love how people keep bringing things like this up.  "But the US funded bin Laden when he was fighting against the Soviets!!"  Yada yada yada.  We've made mistakes in the past, there's blood on our hands for some of them, and we're certainly not perfect.  However, we're right more often than we're wrong, we're right more often than anyone else on this earth, and being wrong in the past doesn't mean we can't do what's right now.

 

You're missing the point. The point is that this ISN'T about what's right. Our government got along fine with Hussein for years - even though we knew of his horrible human-rights violations - until he tried to control a bigger slice of the world oil supply. Then we went to war. It has NEVER been about "what's right".

 

 

This is a racist and imperialist war.

It's neither, though it is commendable of Harrison to use two of the Left's favorite buzzwords in the same sentence.  He's obviously read some of the "intellectuals" that side can boast.  Of course, the war is neither of the things Harrelson claims it to be, but why let facts get in the way of an actor's ignorant beliefs?

 

It's plenty racist, and you're proof of that. ONE MILLION dead Iraqis you just brush off to the side, yet you get bent out of shape over 2700 dead Americans.

 

 

 

... turned it into a perpetual war on any non-white country they choose to describe as terrorist.

Maybe because the "white" countries... (gasp!) don't practice despicable Islamic terrorism!  The IRA has been a problem, but Al'Qaeda and Palestine are both worse.  We haven't pigeonholed Arab men as terrorists; they've done it to themselves by committing acts of terrorism against the West over and over again.

 

Afghanistan and Iraq don't either. Al Qaeda isn't a country.

 

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

 

 

To the men in Washington, the world is just a giant Monopoly board.

What a ridiculous, unjustifiable, and downright idiotic claim.

 

 

It's the truth too. Accept reality or don't, but do not act as if someone who points it out is crazy.

 

The giant industries that are polluting our planet as well as violating human rights worldwide are the ones nearest and dearest to the hearts of American politicians.

Well, I was wondering when we were going to get into the crap about pollution and how big corporations run everything.  Again, it's quite nice of Harrelson to fit two idiotic liberal platforms into one sentence.

 

Yes, pollution and the stupifying control corporations now have over America is a really 'idiotic' thing to worry about.

 

 

When TV satirist Bill Maher made some dissenting remarks about the bombing of Afghanistan, Disney pulled the plug on him.

Which is the fault of Disney, NOT the US government that Harrelson would like to implicate.  The only censorship of Bill Maher was done by the network that aired his show.  I don't agree with it, but it's not like Disney hasn't made a bunch of stupid decisions over the years.

 

You missed the point. He didn't blame the governemnt, he blamed the ignorant, fascist, "you're with us or against us" mind-set for it. Of which you are a part.

 

At least Ted Danson was a star.

 

Ted Danson doesn't have an Oscar nomination.

 

 

In closing, I want you to reread his article and notice how he was able to express his feelings without turning it into a childish bashing of a conservatism (note how Clinton was implicated as well). He didn't blame Bush and the Republican Party because it's not just their fault. The Democrats must be held equally responsible for supporting this insanity.

You could learn a lot from it, like to not use the dissenting opinion of another AMERICAN as an occasion for a red-meat attack on people of the Left.

 

This is fucking insane. The guy is a tax-paying American citizen and his feelings on war are just as valid as yours.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"The best quote to give perspective on actors as credible activists was offered by an actor himself. Brad Pitt, after starring in Seven Years in Tibet, was asked a question about the politics in that part of the world. His answer? "Who cares what I think? I'm a fucking actor." Amen, Brad."

 

Amen -- I remember reading that quote (wasn't it in Time?).

 

I treat an actor's opinions like anyone else's, and if they're stupid I laugh at them...

[Guest danielisthor]

I think the point is, famous people, be they actors, sports stars, politicians or whatever, are given special treatment and can go out and make their opinions heard to millions of people by opening their mouths at any time with cameras and mikes at their beck and call.

 

Whereas, humbly common folk like yourself and I, only have messageboards and an occasional piece in your local newspaper being read by a few handul to a couple of thousand.

[Guest Slapnuts00]

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

You're an idiot.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

You're an idiot.

Wow, excellent counter-point. If you got nothing to say, just say nothing.

[Guest Slapnuts00]

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

You're an idiot.

Wow, excellent counter-point. If you got nothing to say, just say nothing.

I don't need to say anything else. Your idiotic statement stands on it's own to kill your credibility.

[Guest NoCalMike]

Seems your issue with Woody is that he is liberal, not that he is an actor. His article had a lot of truth to it. It was nothing new, but it still speaks a lot of truth. I kind of feel bad for him that he actually thought Clinton was capable of telling the truth, but at least he comes out against Clinton calling him a liar as well. His opinions and views are valid whether you agree with him or not and they deserve our discussion.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

If that post was aimed at me, I wouldn't say I have "issues" with Woody, because I'd have to give a crap about what he says first.

 

"I think the point is, famous people, be they actors, sports stars, politicians or whatever, are given special treatment and can go out and make their opinions heard to millions of people by opening their mouths at any time with cameras and mikes at their beck and call."

 

Yep: Then they complain about "special interests" corrupting Washington...

[Guest Cancer Marney]

His opinions and views are valid whether you agree with him or not

What precisely is your definition of "valid?"

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

This is indeed an idiotic statement. Adjusting for inflation, we've given Israel approximately $376 billion dollars over the past half-century, which averages out to over $7 billion dollars per year. And that's just what's on the books in direct foreign aid: it's common knowledge that we also conduct training for the Israeli army, as well as joint exercises and invaluable military exchange programmes, not to mention the fact that the military hardware we supply to them is of much greater value than its nominal price because our technology is 20-30 years ahead of the rest of the world's. I greatly regret giving Israel this level of funding for the past 53 years.

 

I wish we'd doubled it.

[Guest DrTom]

So that makes a million dead Iraqi civilians acceptable? It's okay because their maniac President signed a sanction to save his own ass?

First, there is no proof that a million Iraqis have died of the conditions cited. Second, there's no proof those deaths were related to the sanctions against Iraq. Sanctions the US *has* lifted in the name of humanitarianism before, I might add.

 

Oh for Christ's sake, just SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Um... no. I have as much right to attack what Harrelson said as he had to say it, and I'm going to exercise that right whether you like it or not. So follow your own advice if capitalized vulgarities are the best you have to offer here.

 

It's a horrible, horrible thing and everybody here still feels terrible about it. But it's happened before.

Yes, it has. But that certainly doesn't mean we should forget about it or take one step toward forgiving it. What we need to do is take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again, which is precisely what we're doing. Maybe you enjoy burying thousands of your countrymen just so you don't have to drop a few bombs and be called "racist" by imbeciles, but I don't.

 

You sound like a fucking clown citing this as if it gives us the right to attack Iraq and Afghanistan and kill thousands (more than were killed on 9/11) of civilians in the process.

First of all, WE DON'T TARGET CIVILIANS. Terrorist do that. That is a very important difference that people like you -- who love to bleat their America-is-evil-too rot from the rooftops, despite the fact it makes you sound like fucking bitter retards -- never quite grasp. We're not going after a regular army here. We're not going after an enemy who at least has some idea of the protocols of combat. We're going after people who use civilians to hijack airliners and fly them into skyscrapers. We're going after people who tell civilians to strap explosives to their chests in order to score more virgins in the afterlife. Civilians sometimes get in the way, and are often unfortunate casualties. But we can't stop going after Al'Qaeda just because civilians died.

 

Maybe he didn't mention the attacks because, unlike yourself, he realizes that it has no place in a discussion of unleashing bombing campaigns on countries full of innocent people. Ya think?

No, I just think you're an idiot. Maybe he didn't mention the attacks because he didn't want his cowardly position to be seen as indefensible in that context. Maybe he didn't mention the attacks because, like most leftists, good ol' Woody is just a peacenik who thinks we can solve the world's problems by talking to terrorists and singing campfire songs as our skyscrapers burn. "Ya think?" indeed. It amuses me that people like you actually think they can patronize me.

 

Hey, Clinton was a great liar and had a genuine knack for making people believe that he cared about someone other than himself. Give credit where it's due.

I do. Clinton was a great speaker, had an enormous amount of personal charisma, had a great way of relating to people, and could probably get Eskimoes to believe they needed more ice. That doesn't change the fact that anything he says has to be looked at in light of his reputation, a reputation Harrelson has obviously chosen to ignore.

 

I think Clinton was someone a lot of people wanted to like as a person. Hell, I wanted to like him. I thought he was smarmy and I didn't like his politics, but I can't say his inhuman charisma and knack for relating to people didn't almost influence me a few times.

 

Our government got along fine with Hussein for years - even though we knew of his horrible human-rights violation - until he invaded Kuwait to try and control a bigger slice of the world oil supply. Then we went to wear.

We could completely cut our ties to Middle Eastern oil and not miss a beat. Heck, we could have done it in 1991; we're just better prepared for it now. I guess some people will always think the war was about oil. If that were true, I think we would have marched into Baghdad, sacked the whole damn place, and tossed Hussein down from this throne. Instead, we liberated Kuwait -- as we said we were going to do all along -- and got out of there. Every country in the world commits human-rights violations to some degree, but we still have to be a part of the world community and (hopefully) try to steer everyone toward what is right.

 

By the way, it's most definitely about what is right. Our current war isn't Us vs. Them so much as it's Good vs. Evil.

 

It's plenty racist, and you're proof of that. ONE MILLION dead Iraqis you just brush off to the side, yet you get bent out of shape over 2700 dead Americans.

So I should care about someone else's people before my own? I think you'll find very few people who are of that mindset. The truth is, I don't want to see anyone die, but give me a choice between an American and someone from the Middle East (or anywhere, but the ME is the most relevant example), and I'll choose that someone else to bite the big green banana of death. The reality is, evil needs to be dealt with, and that's what we're doing right now.

 

Afghanistan and Iraq don't either. Al Qaeda isn't a country.

True, but Al'Qaeda had a lot of bases in Afghanistan, as well as its leader, and has received a lot of money from Iraq since the mid-1990s. Funny that Saddam can give millions to walking pieces of shit like Usama bin Laden, but he can't afford to feed his own people? Want to tell me again how it's OUR fault that Iraqis are dying? Maybe if their leader weren't so desperate to develop WMD and give money to terrorists, he'd be able to keep his people alive better.

 

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year.

This issue has been pretty well beaten to death, but Israel is NOT a terrorist state. They are the victims of repeated terrorist attacks from the Palestinians and their despicable leader. The fact that we can still talk about Palestinians in the present tense is a testament to the remarkable patience of Israel. If they were the terrorists you're making them out to be, the Palestinians would have been slaughtered to a man years ago. There you go.

 

It's the truth too. Accept reality or don't, but do not act as if someone who points it out is crazy.

Its veracity is a matter of opinion. I happen to think that Washington doesn't see the world as a big Monopoly board, because I don't think we have an imperialist agenda. Ergo, I'm going to disagree with Harrelson's overly simplistic analogy and take him to task for using it.

 

Yes, pollution and the stupifying control corporations now have over America is a really 'idiotic' thing to worry about.

Responsible concern about the environment isn't idiotic. Everyone should be encouraged to respect the environment. But to claim that corporations wantonly pollute the environment and pay the government to look the other way IS idiotic, and leftists make that claim regularly.

 

He didn't blame the governemnt, he blamed the ignorant, fascist, "you're with us or against us" mind-set for it. Of which you are a part.

I'm not a part of that. I didn't agree with what Maher said, but I wouldn't want to see him censored or taken off the air for saying it. I'm quite positive on the First Amendment, even when I don't agree with what's being said. Also, I don't have a problem with people who object to the War on Terror on moral grounds because they don't want to see any killing, no matter what. What I DO have a problem with is people saying America is wrong, evil, what have you, for going after terrorists because we've done this and we've done that, blah blah blah. That's moral relativism, and I can't stand it.

 

Ted Danson doesn't have an Oscar nomination.

My point is that he was the star of Cheers. I've always liked him better, as an actor, than Harrelson, though I'm not a fan of either man's politics. I also think Becker is a dashed funny show, even if Danson's titular character is something of a stereotype.

 

You could learn a lot from it, like to not use the dissenting opinion of another AMERICAN as an occasion for a red-meat attack on people of the Left.

The problem is, I find their views so wrong-headed and indefensible. It's a shame, because many liberals are decent people who only want what's best for everyone. I wish I could like more of them, but I can't stand their ideas and politics, and I can't understand how they can honestly defend some of their opinions. I'm sure they feel the same about chaps like me, which is what makes our political spectrum such crazy fun. EMBRACE THE INSANITY~!

 

The guy is a tax-paying American citizen and his feelings on war are just as valid as yours.

Hey, he likes the idea of people withholding the portion of their taxes that would go to the war effort, so don't go calling him a good taxpayer just yet.

[Guest danielisthor]

What, Ted Danson didn't get an Oscar nomination in those classic great films like 3 Men and a Baby and Made in America. holy crap the inhumanity of it all.

[Guest EricMM]

So that makes a million dead Iraqi civilians acceptable? It's okay because their maniac President signed a sanction to save his own ass? That makes it right to deny people basic aid that they'll DIE without?

 

THINK BEFORE YOU TALK! How many palaces does Saddam have? How much does each one cost? How many WMD does he have? How much does each cost. How many soldiers, how much cash? Maybe if Saddam Hussien were to scrap his army he could pay his people. I swear to God, I don't know why you support him, he has all the negative traits that bush has, and he's worse in EVERY WAY, from your point of view. Unless you are seriously anti-american, I can't think of any other way to look at it. If you were in a room with Saddam, would he thank you for your views, or kill you because you're American. What do you think?

 

You're missing the point. The point is that this ISN'T about what's right. Our government got along fine with Hussein for years - even though we knew of his horrible human-rights violations - until he tried to control a bigger slice of the world oil supply. Then we went to war. It has NEVER been about "what's right".

 

It doesn't matter if it wasn't about what was right before. That's assuming you're right, and it's irrelevant either way. It IS about what's right, you JUST mentioned his horrible human rights violations. Should we ignore them? Would that be what's right? Christ...

 

It's plenty racist, and you're proof of that. ONE MILLION dead Iraqis you just brush off to the side, yet you get bent out of shape over 2700 dead Americans.

 

It's not the US govt.'s responsability to watch over the Iraqis. That is Saddam's job. Heh. As previously stated, Saddam couldn't care less what happens to his people as long as he gets his many palatial buildings. Face it, they're not our responsability.

 

Oh, and Israel is a terrorist state yet we still support them and give them a nice 5 BILLION dollar allowance each year. There you go.

 

As previously stated, if Israel were a terrorist state, there would be no Palistine. You think their Hamas and suicide bombers can beat the Israeli army? Of course not. Israel has showed more restraint than anyone has. The suicide bombers are COMPLETELY the problem. Don't be dillusional and believe otherwise.

 

This is fucking insane. The guy is a tax-paying American citizen and his feelings on war are just as valid as yours.

 

Clearly you think his views are more valid than Tom's or even mine. And clearly I don't. Why? Because he is W-R-O-N-G. And just because he is a tax payer, and a voter, doesn't make him smart or right. He can ignore political boundries, but he's still wrong.

 

I agreed with many of his priorities, but I disagreed with many more. The Environment and Farming are very important to run efficently, correctly, and enduringly. It would be nice if we could funnel more money into schools. But the fact remains that his views on war are impractical appeasement.

[Guest TheSatanicAngel]

Marney, just curious to know what the government (and you, I suppose) thinks about the '67 Israeli attack on the Liberty? And why, after an hour plus air assault, we're still funding Israel?

[Guest Ozymandias]

THINK BEFORE YOU TALK!  How many palaces does Saddam have?  How much does each one cost?  How many WMD does he have?  How much does each cost.  How many soldiers, how much cash?  Maybe if Saddam Hussien were to scrap his army he could pay his people.  I swear to God, I don't know why you support him, he has all the negative traits that bush has, and he's worse in EVERY WAY, from your point of view.  Unless you are seriously anti-american, I can't think of any other way to look at it.  If you were in a room with Saddam, would he thank you for your views, or kill you because you're American.  What do you think?

 

I think you're a fucking crackhead. When the fuck did I say I supported Hussein? Was calling him a "maniac" too subtle for you? Again, here's the same stupid 'you're with us or against us' mentality.

 

 

 

It doesn't matter if it wasn't about what was right before.  That's assuming you're right, and it's irrelevant either way.  It IS about what's right, you JUST mentioned his horrible human rights violations.  Should we ignore them?  Would that be what's right?  Christ...

 

 

So you wanna use the military to get involved in ALL the world's problems now? THAT'S a good idea, it worked so well that we no longer have the WTC. Douche.

 

Iraq has done nothing to us that would warrant a war. 4 years ago, Hussein alledgedly had "enough chemical weapons to kill the world's population 3 times over". 4 years later and nothing has happened. If he has the kind of weapons you want to believe he does won't he USE them if attacked?

If you provoke someone who has weapons, he'll use them. Otherwise, why would he? He ain't stupid, he knows if he ever used them on us he'd be a fucking dead man. That's why he hasn't, and that's why he wouldn't unless he is attacked.

 

 

 

It's not the US govt.'s responsability to watch over the Iraqis.  That is Saddam's job.  Heh.  As previously stated, Saddam couldn't care less what happens to his people as long as he gets his many palatial buildings.  Face it, they're not our responsability.

 

It's not our responsibility? The sanctions that we forced him to sign have resulted in one MILLION dead Iraqi civilians (so far). And we KNOW the destruction it causes yet we continue it. How in the fuck are we not responsible for that?

 

 

As previously stated, if Israel were a terrorist state, there would be no Palistine.  You think their Hamas and suicide bombers can beat the Israeli army?  Of course not.  Israel has showed more restraint than anyone has.  The suicide bombers are COMPLETELY the problem.  Don't be dillusional and believe otherwise.

 

They still want their allowance from the US, so they wouldn't try to kill all Palestineans. What do you think would happen if they did? They'd be exposed for the murderous, hypocritical bastards they are. Why would they risk such a thing? THAT is why they haven't tried to kill all Palestineans (though they've certainly killed quite a few). Restraint my ass. If you actually think either side is right in this dispute you need your head examined.

 

 

 

Clearly you think his views are more valid than Tom's or even mine.

 

No, I said they were 'just as valid'. READ.

 

 

 

Fucking clownshoes.

[Guest Ozymandias]

It doesn't help him much, though, since a lot of people in Hollywood are oblivious to what really happens and what "ordinary" folks think, and think empty gestures mean a lot.

 

 

I think he understands a lot better than someone like George W. Bush. Harrelson worked his way to get to where he is. Bush never achieved anything on his own. You think Bush has ANY idea, what it's like for ordinary people when he's been handed everything he could ever want? At least Harrelson was a regular person before entering public life.

[Guest bob_barron]

How did Bush become governor of Texas then?

 

Do you think that was handed to him?

[Guest Ozymandias]

He won it because he is George Bush's son. Simple as that.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Marney, just curious to know what the government (and you, I suppose) thinks about the '67 Israeli attack on the Liberty?  And why, after an hour plus air assault, we're still funding Israel?

It was a compounded series of mistakes in a time of war. There is no rational reason - none - for the incident to have been deliberate. A United States Navy court of inquiry, a CIA report, an NSA inquiry, a JCOS report, plus House and Senate CFR, ACS, and Select Intelligence reports, among countless others, have all established that fact beyond the faintest imaginable shadow of a doubt. They made mistakes. We did too. It happens. Do you want the Canadians to declare war on us for accidentally killing four of theirs in Afghanistan? The Liberty accident falls into the exact same category.

We're still funding Israel because it is the right thing to do. Israel is a transparent, virtuous, and just democracy, and she is in alone in a region which longs not only for her destruction but for the deaths of every last one of her citizens. That is unacceptable. She is our little sister, and we have a duty to protect her.

[Guest EricMM]

When the fuck did I say I supported Hussein? Was calling him a "maniac" too subtle for you? Again, here's the same stupid 'you're with us or against us' mentality.

 

Whatever, point is, Hussien doesn't deserve your protection, he doesn't deserve anyone's protection. Like Bush is a bad person for wanting to get rid of him.

 

So you wanna use the military to get involved in ALL the world's problems now? THAT'S a good idea, it worked so well that we no longer have the WTC.

 

No. I didn't say that either. I was saying that you can't tell me that just because we funded him that we don't have the right to remove him. Thats senseless.

 

If you provoke someone who has weapons, he'll use them. Otherwise, why would he? He ain't stupid, he knows if he ever used them on us he'd be a fucking dead man. That's why he hasn't, and that's why he wouldn't unless he is attacked.

 

Again get your head out of the sand. You think he won't give any terrorists or operatives those bioweapons? I think that we should be glad that he hasn't hurt us yet, and make sure he doesn't. After all, we left the Taliban COMPLETELY alone, and see where that got us.

 

It's not our responsibility? The sanctions that we forced him to sign have resulted in one MILLION dead Iraqi civilians (so far). And we KNOW the destruction it causes yet we continue it. How in the fuck are we not responsible for that?

 

Sigh. As I said. In all my apathy, I am probably still more sympathetic to the plight of the Iraqi people than Saddan Hussien is. Again, if he wanted to feed his people, he could. He doesn't, so his people starve. It's not because of US actions that the Iraqi people are fucked, it's because they have a idiotic despot who is so concerned with himself that he won't feed his own people.

 

No, I said they were 'just as valid'. READ.

 

You can TYPE anything you want. But you certainly show by your actions that you consider Wood's opinions higher than mine. Shit, everyones biased, but some people are right, and some are wrong.

 

I can't believe you're one of the few people on this board that has anything resembling my political ideologies. You're so fucking biased it's sick. You're not even biased towards your country, your leaders, or your people. You're biased against them.

 

You need to get it through your head that Iraq's problem is not the US, it's the man in charge. The restrictions are in place because if they were not, he'd be a lot more rich, funding a much bigger military machine, and would get his nukes faster. What the FUCK would we do then? Tell me how you think Saddam Hussiens actions are the US's fault. Why we should bend over backwards and stick our necks out for people that are NOT US Citizens. First US, THEN the rest of the world. What's a government for? (Besides hiding all the alien crafts of course)