So, I'm guessing you have not seen this thing, or intend to see it, right?
Sean Penn does not have a big part at all.
The ultimate conclusion of this docu (apart from the cowardice of the so called "liberal media"), is that the U.S. is a great nation, and has a constitution that formulates what has been forgotten in recent years: That the President is an administrator. He is supposed to enforce the policies of the people.
What is really interesting for me, coming from a country that has always (officially, though the king now has no power whatsoever) been a monarchy, is that the U.S. is becoming more and more like a monarchy of old. That is, with the guy at the top making all the decisions, and the people are being thought of as blobs that are supposed to support his every move.
True, people are not put to death if they disagree (at least not U.S. citizens), but they are subjected to character assassination.
The interview towards the end, with Senator Wayne Morse, is extremely informative. The senator pleads the fact that the people should be given the facts about foreign policy. The interviewer plainly states that the people cannot formulate foreign policy, and that the President is the one who should do it. Not very democratic, now is it?
Webster's on democracy:
a: Government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
It says nothing about any form of supreme power held by one individual.
Unfortunately, the people that need to see this kind of thing are the ones that too busy trashing it to watch it.
Seriously, these people think they're geniuses because they 'figured out' that the government spins things? Or that we enter into wars to benefit our own national interest? These are only revelations to retards.
Then why are there people in the U.S. that still think that the war in Iraq is to "free the Iraqis", and "bring democracy and peace to the region"?
Of course, governments spin things, and try to make their decisions look like the best, if not only, way to go. That does not make it right!
Quidquid Latinae dictum sit, altum viditur.
reply
share
nothing_important
16 years ago
First off, the original poster suggests national benefit from war. The movie mentions that using peace as a rationale for war brings perpetual war. It later points out: a) In 1968 a study by the Boston Globe of over 30 major print media sources found zero papers editorializing in support of withdrawing from Vietnam, despite a large segment of outspoken members of the public insisting on it. The mainstream media is behind the grassroots. Why? b) When this movement became too large to ignore, the troops began returning but the strategy shifted to an air war to deliver a "winnable" war. So in fact the war initiative surged. Why? c) A present-day commentator is quoted in the movie as saying "they are reflexively opposed to war, its a principled position but its the wrong position and you can't take them seriously as a strategic voice." Yet, the highest rated program on MSNBC is given the boot (Donahue was canned) 3 weeks before the war started in 2003. The internal memo used the following phrases to explain: "a difficult public face for NBC in a time of war..," "seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush..," "our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity."
This final phrase returns to the tone set by the original poster, that we go to war to benefit our country. The fallacy offered is that our wealth--such as it is--depends upon the media and capitalism which depends on war. I believe in taking what you like and leaving the rest. Why can't we have the first two without the last, except as a means of defense? I believe the gravity and seriousness of this dilemma is emoted in the ending quotation given by the movie, of Dr. King. He speaks of silence and initiative. I urge everyone who respects the man to give this movie its hour and then listen to that quotation.
YES.not-specifically.I actually find all of them rather weird.YES.footlong veggie-on-wheat.THANK-U
reply
share