Anti-Bush Sentiment Busts Out All Over

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPPrint/LAC/20040417/HOLLYWOOD17/TPEntertainment/
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0417-01.htm

Published on Saturday, April 17, 2004 by the Globe & Mail (Canada)

Anti-Bush Sentiment Busts Out All Over
And it's not just the usual suspects taking shots. The fire is coming from feature film, theatre and TV

by Simon Houpt

NEW YORK -- It was an unusual occasion for a political statement. On Wednesday morning, the day after George W. Bush hosted a prime-time news conference to defend the fuzzy state of affairs in Iraq, architect James Polshek took the podium at a Brooklyn Museum preview to speak of the challenges in completing a multimillion dollar glass-and-steel renovation to the museum entrance.

"Building is a little like war. Once you get in it, you have to go all the way," he said. "But in this case, we did so successfully." Polshek paused, and a tiny smile crept across his face while the assembled media and museum supporters offered chuckles and light applause. "I don't want to get into that."

So much for architecture being a non-partisan discipline. Anti-administration politics are busting out of their usual homes in music, books, fine art and standup comedy, and crossing easily over into feature films, theatre, and even mainstream television shows in the run-up to this November's U.S. presidential election. At the same time, many of the flag-waving, administration-friendly movies that Hollywood rushed to produce in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, either foundered in development or are bombing at the box office, including the current The Alamo.

Writers and others say the sniping now directed at the White House is at least partly a response to the self-censorship they endured for more than a year after the terrorist attacks for fear of being seen as disloyal, and the disenchantment many have over the perception that George W. Bush intentionally misled the nation into war.


..more..

(Apologies to Chuck Brown & the Soul Searchers)

it's about time...I've been expecting this for months.

Get ready. The Mighty Righties will respond with the big dirty hammer.

"..at least partly a response to the self-censorship they endured for more than a year after the terrorist attacks"

I remember thinking to myself after 9/11 and the rush to war that the absence of alternative opinions would only hold so long, and there would be a backlash. Everyone was emotional, and understandably so, but you can't stifle dialogue in any kind of relationship and not expect there to be consequences. I don't blame Bush for going to war in Afghanistan -- that was the right thing to do. But everything he's done since then has been pretty ridiculous. People are tired of being told to "shut up!"

that was the right thing to do."

Why, in your opinion, was it the right thing to do?

We still do not know who attacked us on September 11, 2001. No proof has been brought forth. We especially had no proof in October 2001.

It bothers me when I read such sentiments, even when they come out of Dean's mouth.

Someone(s) in TPTB structure has decided whistle ass must go, ergo the tiny stream of anti-bush comments that have been allowed.

...they have a tape where he's bragging out it. I don't think there's much question who did it.

or the skinny Osama?

Those tapes were debunked well over a year ago.

Don't read the news much, eh?

Skoooo. That's a tell if there ever was one.

The man on the tape didn't even look like Osama

Bin Laden at the "press conference" - so I guess that solves the mystery.

My money is still on LIHOP/MIHOP.

If their treatment of the Afghani people wasn't reason enough, the deliberate mortar destructions of the ancient Buddha statues did it for me. There was nothing good about the Taliban, and they weren't native Afghani's either. They were an occupation force themselves, and complicit with Al Quada.

OBL is from the House of Saud.
None of the hijackers were Afghani's.
It was not a 'state sponsored act of terrorism'.

Just because OBL happened to be chillin' in a cave in Afghanistan gives us the right to bomb the entire country to rubble ?

:shrug: Enlighten me.


:hippie:

response to a criminal action. There was no investigation to determine who did it. We simply swallowed the unsubstantiated BS the Bush Cabal spewed out and invaded a country that had nothing to do with the efforts of a handful of ALLEGED criminals. We do not know who did 9-11. There has NEVER been an investigation.

Bush had planned in July 2001 to carpet bomb Afghanistan because the Taliban had refused to cooperate with their plans to build a pipeline through Afghanistan. They were threatened at that time with carpet bombing and the plan was drafted and was to begin before winter. It came off exactly as planned.

Invading Afghanistan had absolutely nothing to do with 9-11 or with "terrorism". It was a previous threat carried out via the shock of 9-11. It is amazing to me how many Americans have convinced themselves that this was an appropriate response to a criminal action which, if we hadn't fallen through the looking glass, would have been investigated, the true criminals apprehended and brought to trial through an international effort, which has been successful in the past. Instead Americans applaud the inappropriate bombing of a country for ten months, the killing of tens of thousands of innocent people who had not one thing to do with 9-11, to apprehend no one.

BIZARRE!

bin laden did it. that's where he was. we should have gotten him, imo.

Just because the bu$h people said its so, its so?

1.) Osama was there. He did do the attacks. Maybe Bu$h let them happen, I could see him being that stupid or evil. But Osama was responsible. We should have caught him, but Dumbya took his sweet time responding to 9-11 with force (unlike the "imminent threat" in Iraq).

2.) Not just that. There was alot of ominous chatter on the radio of Al-Qaeda previous to the attacks. Bu$h should have been listening, but he wasn't.

3.) Al-Qaeda took responsibility for the attacks while every other terrorist group was trying to distance themselves from 9-11.

4.) Why, ask yourselves, would, of all the counties that hate us, would we go after AFGHANISTAN? What's there, three goats and some opium? That's it. There is nothing else we could want in Afghanistan. Why didn't Bu$h just say it was Iraq's doing, not Al-Qaeda, at that time. Very few would have protested and Dumbya would have been able to take Iraq early. But he invaded Afghanistan instead.

There was no benefit whatsoever, politically or economically for Bu$h or his cronies. He went in because, shockingly, it was what needed to be done for national security (No one's gonna ruin this country except the GOP and Dumbyass' gonna make sure of that).

5.) Richard Clarke, the guy who had the guts to stand up to the Administration, said that 9-11 was Al-Qaeda's responsibility.

There was no benefit whatsoever, politically or economically for Bu$h or his cronies. BushCorp never does anything unless it is of some benefit to them.

Agreement On US 3.2 Billion Gas Pipeline Project Signed
PakNews.com

December 28, 2002

Pakistan, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan on Friday signed here a framework agreement for a US $ 3.2 billion gas pipeline project passing through the three countries.

The ceremony was held at the Presidential Palace with the three leaders, Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali, President Saparmurat Niyazov of Turkmenistan and Afghan President Hamid Karzai signing the document.

The framework agreement defines legal mechanism for setting up a consortium to build and operate the pipeline.
http://www.truthout.com/docs_02/12.30A.afgh.pipe.htm

President Bush has appointed a former aide to the American oil company Unocal, Afghan-born Zalmay Khalilzad, as special envoy to Afghanistan. The nomination was announced December 31, nine days after the US-backed interim government of Hamid Karzai took office in Kabul.

The nomination underscores the real economic and financial interests at stake in the US military intervention in Central Asia. Khalilzad is intimately involved in the long-running US efforts to obtain direct access to the oil and gas resources of the region, largely unexploited but believed to be the second largest in the world after the Persian Gulf.

As an advisor for Unocal, Khalilzad drew up a risk analysis of a proposed gas pipeline from the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. He participated in talks between the oil company and Taliban officials in 1997, which were aimed at implementing a 1995 agreement to build the pipeline across western Afghanistan.
http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=1149

ON EDIT: There's a lot out on there on this topic. Search Unocal Afghanistan.

Good Point, especially since all Hijackers were from Saudi like OBL.

We flew OBL relatives out of usa. Lot more to all this.

The 'kick butt' mentality wanted someone or something to go dump on. The usa was already building up forces before 9/11.

This is link to a story published on alternet.org SEPT 4, 2001

http://alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=11427

even if bin Laden was responsible, a war was not needed..

www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0WDQ/2001_Oct_22/80338926/p1/article.jhtm...

Bush rejects Taliban's offer on handing over bin Laden.
Asian Political News, Oct 22, 2001

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14 Kyodo

President George W. Bush on Sunday rejected an offer from Afghanistan's ruling Taliban to discuss turning over Islamic militant Osama bin Laden if the United States stops air strikes against Afghanistan.

''There is no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty,'' Bush told reporters as he returned to the White House from his Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland.

''Turn him over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostage they hold over, destroy all the terrorist camps. There's no need to negotiate...I told them exactly what they need to do,'' Bush said.

The Bush administration believes bin Laden masterminded the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. It accuses the Taliban of providing shelter to the Saudi fugitive and his al-Qaida network of terrorist groups.

At a news conference in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, on Sunday, Taliban Deputy Prime Minister Haji Abdul Kabir said the Taliban would be willing to discuss handing over bin Laden to a third country, or putting him on trial in Afghanistan, if the U.S. military ends bombing and provides evidence of his involvement in the attacks on the U.S
..more..

August 6, 2001 - "No actionable intelligence"
October 14, 2001 - "We know he's guilty"

Considering that Richard Jewell, not Eric Rudolf, was regarded as "guilty" up to six months after the Olympic Park bombings, it's fascinating to see how quickly Dim Son found "actionable intelligence" against a country on the other side of the globe.

LIHOP!

actionable intelligence points to...LIHOP

Or "Start an Investigation?"

Christ, that's sad. I agree that war is horrible and should only be used as the last resort. But with the Taliban, the case is as clear as you could ever expect it to be. So what that the hijackers were Saudi and Egyptian? That's how Al Quada works.

When someone kills your child, you have two choices: fight back or do nothing. An 'investigation' into the killing has to be backed up by action. I have never seen any credible evidence that the hijackings were the responsibility of anyone but Al Quada. They had attacked us many times before. The Taliban sheltered Al Quada for years. Why are you in so much denial about this?

Now, if you want to start a thread about weather Al Quada and the Taliban were justified in their actions, that's a different question.

am I right?

no matter whether there is any evidence that they killed your child. In your agony, in your grief and in your angst you are certain that one certain person did it, even though there is no evidence.

It does not matter what the rule, the justice, is in this land

We are to behave like brutal, animal like, barbarians--if we think you killed our child, you are going to be killed and also all your children, your parents, and your nephews and neices and their mother and their father and all the rest of your family.

And, ahh-- the blood lust goes on and on. NO matter how many are killed in retaliation, you are still left with the feeling that you have not been avenged. This is quite obvious in those who insist upon the death penalty for those who have killed their loved ones. 'The perpetrator is killed and lo and behold, there is still NO satisfaction. The family of the loved one still grieves. Still cries at night, Still grieves and grieves even though the one who killed their loved one has been killed by the state. There is still no CLOSURE.

In the end, even though thousands have been killed to avenge the death of your one most precious, child, the perpetrators you are not sure of, so seems perfectly logical that killing everyone around that one who is the suspect, should, in the end, hit and kill, the killer of your child.

and our laws can be very well put aside because there IS NO JUSTICE when a child has been killed, and we KNOW who did it, WITHOUT any evidence at all. We just know who did it, because we believe the propaganda of powerful and rich people who have an agenda and that agenda is to blame someone, declare them the killer, and take over their country and kill all of their relatives ot the tune of thousands and thousands.
\
Do you not see the barabarism in that?

For that matter, George Bush has murdered thousands of the children and the babies and the pregnant women in Iraq.

So it is not unusual, that these people become resistors to the invasion, become defenders of their children against an evil George Bush.

Right?

:hurts: Commander Bunnypants, such a brave AWOL



http://www.awolbush.com/

Our own?

Until 9/11 is actually fully hashed out,...nothing this president did will be looked upon without a great deal of skepticism.

speaking out against bush and the invasion and occupation of Iraq! I am beginning to hold out hope this guy is gone come Nov/2004!

But I am 43 years old and have been watching American politics very closely since the late 70's. I have been more than hopeful for most of 2004. Here's why:

-The Democrats didn't implode, and came up with a strong, and safe candidate - even if he is less than inspiring.

-For what ever reason (greed or ineptitude?), the economy really hasn't improved for the vast majority of Americans, and those suffering know it, despite the media coverage of corporate profits.

-The security of Americans is more threatened now than it perhaps ever has been, and * seems helpless to do anything about it.

-The war is going badly

Unless there is a turn around on at least half of these issues, I think Americans will vote * out of office, and won't even look too closely at Kerry, since he's a known quantity. And unfortunately for * (and fortunately for man kind), all of these issues are out of RNC control. Even the economy is out of control - and it shouldn't be.

You'd at least think that the Exxon Presidency could lower the price of gas during an election year, but it's hard to get a room full of billionaires to control their greed these days.

say, "it's become very vogue to bash Bush". It does seem like we're hearing it all the time, now.

My take: the voices of dissent were always there. From the minute Bush and his coterie of clowns stepped into the White House, there were protests. Then, on the march toward war, the entire world stood up and made its objections known. The problem is, the media was silenced by the admnistration. There have been many memorable people who have "said it like it is". The volume was turned down, that's all.

But like the waves which pound upon the rocks and eventually turn them into sand, those voices became louder and more and more people joined in. Notice the recent addition of Air America onto the radio dial.

It truly gives me hope that this is still my country.

and it has nothing to do with when things start.

I guess maybe because it is about Texas' fight for independence, but I never would have tied the two together, but I haven't seen it yet, either. Does anyone have any specifics on this?

The Alamo legend, in and of itself, is a justification of Manifest Destiny, and I would argue that PNAC's vision is the 21st century equivalent. This movie seeks, to some extent, to humanize the legends surrounding the individuals involved, but in so doing it also serves to attempt to bring us closer to them and feel sympathy for their plight, thus furthering the justification by making it accessible to a modern audience. The story is just another reworking of the "white man's burden" to take over from all the "brown people" and civilize the world. In the process, the white man suffers and endures. Everyone else is evil. The ending in which we are telescoped forward in time toward the ultimate victory makes a stark statement on this point.

It should also be noted that the humanization of the characters bluntly ends when it comes to the Mexicans who assaulted the Alamo. Santa Anna is almost a one-dimensional character bent on revenge, destruction, sullying women's virtue, and just plain up to no good.

In a word, it's crap.

from the standpoint of creating believable characters.

I hadn't thought about taking over from all the "brown people" I guess because I live with about 50% (or more) "brown people" in south Texas. I appreciate your analysis of their production.

Two years ago, or even one year ago, it would have been inconceivable. Now, it is all over the place.

Geez, after 18 months of being called a traitor and anti-patriotic and a commie/socialist and all that,...perhaps there will be alot less of that crap now that the wave of voices are growing.

Oh yeah. We're groovin'

:bounce: :bounce:

http://www.wgoeshome.com

:) :bounce: :smoke:

has about 40 Flash movies that Bash this admin and have for over a year and a half..

we joked on our radio show about the new DNC ad being a nod to our style of flash movie making and that we are now "old school" when it comes to political flash attacks :)

have a look,

http://www.takebackthemedia.com

and when the DNC sent me theirs I deleted it just out of principal.
was it any good?

a LOT better than the last crop, everyone was complaining mightily and with good cause..

it was SO poorly done..

this one works.

...but I just feel tired and more than a little bit sad.

It's about time. Talk about pent up demand!!!

Bush has us going straight downstream and over the fall, full speed ahead. On the other hand Clinton and now Kerry say they can turn the boat and head up stream to safety and the good life for all. Unfortunately I don't see it that way. We Americans and all humans have monumental problems before us. Here is my list and I wonder what folks think Kerry will do about them. I will vote for Kerry but only with my nose held closed.

Energy depletion, oil today, natural gas soon;

Global warming, now an absolute fact (let's burn more coal;, ya right);

Planetary food shortages, now or soon;

American job losses to the third world, i.e. the race to the bottom of the labor pool;

Wealth disparity, rising like a rocket here and around the globe;

The "Israeli" problem, which the Israelies seem bound to hold onto;

The mining of all the worlds resources, energy, forests, soils, ocean resources, farm land, rivers, on and on.

Does either candidate have answerers to these issues? No, in fact they both choose to ignore them or make up fantasy solutions like the "hydrogen solution".

Bob, not hopeful in SoCal

someone else ate the blue pill...

can be said to be relaying the truth to people.

There is some sniping at Bush beginning to be seen and heard, but
this is directed mainly at his stupidity. There is still a way to
go before the average person begins to think "Bush stupid - doesn't
understand things very well - might make wrong decisions - lead us
to war on a mistake - ooops, better get rid of him."

Even at Bush's press conference last week, few journalists bothered
to ask really tough questions, and those that did, generally didn't
keep pressing the issue. They have let us all down badly, and
continue to do so. The only people who know what's really going on
are those who bother to hit the Net and find out for themselves.

John Pilger, a journalist well-known and respected - I might even say
revered - by the left in Australia, has this to say in an excellent
article posted on Friday in the U.K. New Statesma.

Link here: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0416-10.htm

You won't see anything like this in mainstream press in the U.S.,
U.K. or Australia, never mind the media owned by the likes of
Murdoch. Bush and Blair (not forgetting Howard, although he's just
a pipsqueak player in this) could never have got away with what they
have unleashed on the world without the complicity of the media.
Whether journalists have actively conspired, or have simply followed
the orders of their proprietors, or whether they have simply failed
to follow the first rules of journalism (verify, verify, verify),
they are guilty of gross deception of the reading and viewing public.
(It's a pity that most of the public are so easy to deceive, but
that's another story).

Yes, Bush is guilty of gross stupidity and mismanagement, but
recognising that still doesn't get the truth out there to the public.
Meanwhile, the death toll is rising in Iraq with shocking rapdity,
and Ariel Sharon has been given the green light to take out whomever
he pleases, knowing that the increasingly sidelined U.N. will never
hold him accountable.

Look what Bush has managed to do in just over three years - murder,
mayhem, war, and assassination occurring on a daily basis, and who
knows what is coming? Do we hear or see anything of a world being
drawn into this horrifying spiral of destruction in our local media?
Where are the newspaper headlines crying that this must stop? There
is instead a perception that the majority of people are simply
accepting that the world is on a war footing, without thinking how
or why we got here. Osama? Who's he? Oh, yeah, that guy - well
at least Saddam's gone, so things will get better now ....

Great - let's have a laugh at Bush the clown, but there's still a
stupid, brutal war going on, and we're all living in a stage of
siege, because only the loony left are saying hang on a minute,
it doesn't have to be like this. And sadly, our voices are still
only a little sound, barely heard under the noise of our leaders
insisting on war and more war.

We have a long way to go yet.

He'll be cast out on his butt. But it has to be before November.