"Anti-American" Americans

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

…Martin Sheen, Susan Sarandon, Matt Damon, David Duchovny, Gillian Anderson, Samuel L. Jackson, Jessica Lange, Danny Glover, Helen Hunt, Ethan Hawke, Kim Basinger… Just like myself, and anyone else who is opposed to a war against Iraq, they - included as a handful of approximately one hundred American artists and Hollywood celebrities - must be anti-American and manifestly must loathe freedom and justice.

We are patriotic Americans who share the belief that Saddam Hussein cannot be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction. We support rigorous UN weapons inspections to assure Iraq’s effective disarmament.

However, a pre-emptive military invasion of Iraq will harm American national interests . Such a war will increase human suffering, arouse animosity toward our country, increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks, damage the economy, and undermine our moral standing in the world. It will make us less, not more, secure.

We reject the doctrine - a reversal of long-held American tradition - that our country, alone, has the right to launch first-strike attacks.

The valid U.S. and UN objective of disarming Saddam Hussein can be achieved through legal diplomatic means. There is no need for war. Let us instead devote our resources to improving the security and well-being of people here at home and around the world.

Signed,

Artists for Winning Without War

Mike Farrell, Co-Chair
Robert Greenwald, Co-Chair
Gillian Anderson
Edward Asner
Rene Auberjonois
David Bale
Kim Basinger
Ed Begley, Jr.
Theo Bikel
Barbara Bosson
Jackson Browne
Peter Buck (REM)
Diahann Carroll
Eugene J. Carroll, Jr.,
Rear Adm. U.S. Navy (Ret.)
Kathleen Chalfant
Don Cheadle
Jill Clayburgh
David Clennon
Jack Coleman
Peter Coyote
Lindsay Crouse
Suzanne Cryer
Matt Damon
Dana Daurey
Ambassador Jonathan Dean
(U.S. Rep. to NATO
Warsaw Pact)
Vincent D’Onofrio
David Duchovny
Olympia Dukakis
Charles S. Dutton
Hector Elizondo
Cary Elwes
Shelley Fabares
Mike Farrell
Mia Farrow
Laurence Fishburne
Sean Patrick Flanery
Bonnie Franklin
John Fugelsang
Jeananne Garafalo
Larry Gelbart
Melissa Gilbert
Danny Glover
Elliott Gould
Samaria Graham
Robert Greenwald
Robert Guillaume
Paul Haggis
Robert David Hall
Ethan Hawke
Ken Howard
Helen Hunt
Anjelica Huston
LaTanya Richardson Jackson
Samuel L. Jackson
Jane Kaczmarek
Melina Kanakaredes
Casey Kasem
Mimi Kennedy
Jessica Lange
Tea Leoni
Wendie Malick
Camryn Manheim
Marsha Mason
Richard Masur
Dave Matthews
Kent McCord
Robert Duncan McNeill
Mike Mills (REM)
Janel Moloney
Esai Morales
Ed O’Neill
Chris Noth
Peter Onorati
Alexandra Paul
Ambassador Edward Peck
(former U.S. Ambassador
to Iraq)
Seth Peterson
CCH Pounder
David Rabe
Alan Rachins
Bonnie Raitt
Carl Reiner
Tim Robbins
Steve Robinson,
Sgt., U.S. Army (Ret.)
Mitch Ryan
Susan Sarandon
Tony Shalhoub
Jack Shanahan,
Vice Adm. U.S. Navy (Ret.)
William Schallert
Martin Sheen
Armin Shimerman
Gloria Steinem
Marcia Strassman
Michael Stipe (REM)
Susan Sullivan
Loretta Swit
Studs Terkel
Lily Tomlin
Blair Underwood
Dennis Weaver
Bradley Whitford
James Whitmore
James Whitmore, Jr.
Alfre Woodard
Noah Wyle
Peter Yarrow
Howard Zinn

2

i am including this in the WA Forum because i think it is related to the numerous articles posted regarding the suppression of dissenting voices in mainstream media, particularly North America-based media.

Hollywood stars say war would harm US interests, Scotsman, 11 December 2002

MORE than 100 celebrities, including Kim Basinger, Matt Damon and Ethan Hawke, have urged the United States president, George Bush, to avoid a war with Iraq in a letter.

The letter, also signed by Samuel L Jackson and Jessica Lange, as well as a retired admiral and a former US envoy to Iraq, was to be made public at a press conference hosted by the former MASH star Mike Farrell yesterday. Farrell is co-founder of a new group called “Artists United To Win Without War”.

According to a report in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times, the celebrities will denounce war talk in Washington as “alarming and unnecessary”. The simple declaration urges the disarming of Iraq through “legal diplomatic means”. It was expected to say: "We are patriotic Americans who share the belief that Saddam Hussein cannot be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction. We support rigorous UN weapons inspections to assure Iraq’s effective disarmament.

“However, a pre-emptive military invasion of Iraq will harm American national interests. Such a war will increase human suffering, arouse animosity toward our country, increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks, damage the economy, and undermine our moral standing in the world.”

The campaign has been organised by Farrell and Robert Greenwald, the director of The Burning Bed and the director-producer of the upcoming film My Dark Places. Artists United to Win Without War also plans to run a full-page advert in the national edition of the New York Times. The statement will then be forwarded to President Bush.

“There was an environment created after 9/11 where somehow it wasn’t patriotic to speak out,” Mr Greenwald told the Los Angeles Times. “There have been an increasing number of voices raised against war, but they have not done an effective job of reaching TV, radio and the print media.”

The stars align against the war, LA Times, 11 December 2002 [May have to initially register for access]

Stars oppose war with Iraq, Guardian
Suzanne Goldenberg, 11 December 2002

3

:k:

4

Yep, saw them addressing the media it in the local news :k:

5

WHat a polyglotic brood of peaceniks. :k:

I can’t wait for them to entertain the troops in the staging areas for USO. Love these guys !!!

6

:~) Thanks, Ums and 5Abi.

7

I don't think that anyone is accusing this group of being "anti-american". They are offering their dissent, and frankly their public statement is reasonable and well thought out. Interestingly, they had coverage on virtually all networks, and had fairly lively debates. Dissent is hard to organize, but they offered some comments on other religious and social groups that could present dissenting policy opinions.

Undoubtedly this is a very liberal group, but they were heard, and they reflect a lot of the concerns of the average American. To imagine that most Americans are not reluctant about a conflict with Iraq, or do not have reservations about some of the possible outcomes is painting the US public with a very simplistic brush.

If you look at some of the surveys that have been done, the support for intervention is about a mile wide and an inch deep.

My current hypothesis is that when history is written, this will be viewed as one of the worlds most elaborate bluffs. Everything that is being done is consistent with "sabre rattling pressure", but there are some more telling facts. First, there has been no great stockpiling of oil incase of interruption. This was very pronounced during 1991. Second, it was announced that one of the US carriers will be returning home on schedule, it had been speculated that it would extend it's tour in the gulf for any conflict. Third, there has been no large scale call up of military reserves. Fourth, despite problems in Venezuela, oil prices have not rocketed up, and there is very little "War premium built into the current oil price". Historically the oil traders are very savvy, and have been able to accurately predict oil flow quite well.

While everyone is worried that the US will attack unilaterally, it is that threat which creates the impetus for Iraq to work within the UN bounds to deter unilateralism.

8

Nadia,

How does this make them anti-American and indicate that they loathe freedom and justice? They are actually enjoying the freedoms of democracy by their protests. Hollywood has always been liberal and anti-war. To say that anyone who opposes war against Iraq is anti-American, is like saying all dossiers are glossy, magical and hypocritical.

9

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
My current hypothesis is that when history is written, this will be viewed as one of the worlds most elaborate bluffs. Everything that is being done is consistent with "sabre rattling pressure", but there are some more telling facts. First, there has been no great stockpiling of oil incase of interruption. This was very pronounced during 1991. Second, it was announced that one of the US carriers will be returning home on schedule, it had been speculated that it would extend it's tour in the gulf for any conflict. Third, there has been no large scale call up of military reserves. Fourth, despite problems in Venezuela, oil prices have not rocketed up, and there is very little "War premium built into the current oil price". Historically the oil traders are very savvy, and have been able to accurately predict oil flow quite well.

While everyone is worried that the US will attack unilaterally, it is that threat which creates the impetus for Iraq to work within the UN bounds to deter unilateralism.
[/QUOTE]

Bingo. The threat of war may bring peace while the threat of peace could cause war (how's that for spin).

10

Caterwalling by non-entities! Hollywood hasn't produced much of merit since going from black and white to color! Same for the music industry! The only one missing from the list is that loser, Eminem! These are the same idiots who practice and promote the immoral lifestyles that the extremists on Gupshup are always hollering about! Send 'em all to Cuba, I say! :)

Peace To All Who Read This...

11

Most Americans are anti-war. But many of us are also anti-catastrophic terror event.

If anyone can tell me unequivocally that WMD in the hands of Saddaam poses little or no threat to America or Israel, then yes the talk of war or threat of it is unneccesary.

If the U.N. can eliminate this threat absolutely, then there will absolutely be no conflict. Can Hollywood actors ensure that this will be the case?

Besides how can you give legitimacy to a list like this that doesn't include Hollywood titans like Abe Vigoda or even Storch, Larry Storch that is.

12

:k:

13

OhioGuy,
>>To imagine that most Americans are not reluctant about a conflict with Iraq, or do not have reservations about some of the possible outcomes is painting the US public with a very simplistic brush.<<
Acknowledged. You make a good point with this. The predominant reason that i posted this article was because, of late, i have felt increasingly in this particular Forum that i am being called on to defend myself from attacks of being anti-American. If i was truly 'anti-American', then i wouldn't let the title bother me (i would probably wear it as a badge of honour) but since i know i am not, it does bother me. Hence just wanted to illustrate that there are American citizens out there who are just as adamant as i am regarding their opposition to a war against Iraq.

>>To say that anyone who opposes war against Iraq is anti-American, is like saying all dossiers are glossy, magical and hypocritical.<<
Seminole, i find this slightly confusing - particularly as the very individuals who are responding in this thread are precisely the ones who have called me anti-American in the past in this very Forum.

Mr Pockets, So now the celebrities are unworthy in your opinion ? And as for the extremists, they certainly a comprise a minority of opinions on Gupshup.

Storch, The point of this thread is the following - that if most Americans are anti-war (as you stated in your post), does that make them necessarily anti-American? And if not, then should the same apply towards those who are anti-war in this Forum? Why are they labelled as being anti-American?

14

Nadia:
You seem to be suggesting that people in GupShup have been labeled as anti-American by some in the American contingent on this board solely because they are opposed to a war with Iraq. Personally, I would never dream of labelling someone as "anti-American" based upon their considered opinion on a single issue. I would need to see a repetitive and recurring pattern of opposing and/or attacking virtually all US policies and actions before dreaming of categorizing someone like that.

That said, Hollywood has always been a bastion for leftist leaning liberals who find that opposing virtually any and every US military action is somehow the avant garde thing to do. A lot of these folks are too young to claim being part of the anti-war movement of the 60s and believe opposing all military activity somehow ties them to that honorable legacy.

Some of the signers on that document might actually be anti-American (you don't need to be a foreigner to earn that label. Some Americans just can't seem to help hating themselves.). But, if they are anti-American, they have earned the label based on many, many things.....not just their current stated opposition to war with Iraq.

15

My Voice,
Your first sentence hit the nail on the head, although i should add it's not exclusively the "American contingent" on this board from whom labels of anti-Americanism have been forthcoming; some desi Guppies have also accused me of the same.

>>I would need to see a repetitive and recurring pattern of opposing and/or attacking virtually all US policies and actions before dreaming of categorizing someone like that.<<
In your personal opinion, do you think i am guilty of doing this while simultaneously not providing any rational reasons for criticizing particular US policies? Do i go on a rampage of "attacking" US policies without providing any reasons? We will manifestly disagree on the validity of those reasons, but at least i am not going around opposing these policies without providing a foundation first.

>>That said, Hollywood has always been a bastion for leftist leaning liberals who find that opposing virtually any and every US military action is somehow the avant garde thing to do. A lot of these folks are too young to claim being part of the anti-war movement of the 60s and believe opposing all military activity somehow ties them to that honorable legacy.<<
Two of those 100 individuals include a retired admiral, Eugene Carroll Jr, and a former United States ambassador to Iraq, Edward Peck.

Regarding your last comments - IMHO it's not anti-American for these Americans to oppose their government's policies, it's a more genuine reflection of one's patriotism i think to call upon your government to abide by the principles for which it should be known for.

16

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
I don't think that anyone is accusing this group of being "anti-american". They are offering their dissent, and frankly their public statement is reasonable and well thought out. Interestingly, they had coverage on virtually all networks, and had fairly lively debates. Dissent is hard to organize, but they offered some comments on other religious and social groups that could present dissenting policy opinions.

Undoubtedly this is a very liberal group, but they were heard, and they reflect a lot of the concerns of the average American. To imagine that most Americans are not reluctant about a conflict with Iraq, or do not have reservations about some of the possible outcomes is painting the US public with a very simplistic brush.

If you look at some of the surveys that have been done, the support for intervention is about a mile wide and an inch deep.

My current hypothesis is that when history is written, this will be viewed as one of the worlds most elaborate bluffs. Everything that is being done is consistent with "sabre rattling pressure", but there are some more telling facts. First, there has been no great stockpiling of oil incase of interruption. This was very pronounced during 1991. Second, it was announced that one of the US carriers will be returning home on schedule, it had been speculated that it would extend it's tour in the gulf for any conflict. Third, there has been no large scale call up of military reserves. Fourth, despite problems in Venezuela, oil prices have not rocketed up, and there is very little "War premium built into the current oil price". Historically the oil traders are very savvy, and have been able to accurately predict oil flow quite well.

While everyone is worried that the US will attack unilaterally, it is that threat which creates the impetus for Iraq to work within the UN bounds to deter unilateralism.
[/QUOTE]

Lemme get to the bottom line, you support the attack on Iraq? Yes or no? If yes or no, explain your judgment.

17

and who will listen to these actors?
u think that BUSH will consult them b4 attacking iraQ?
u think these ppl will still oppose BUSH if he decided to attack iraQ next week?

i can assure u that these same ppl will volunteer to go to middle east and entertain their troops as they go and kill innocent ppl just to teach some lesson to sadaam :nook:

gosh u ppl are worse than kids … itz very easy to charm you all … these lolipop type stories are nothing but waste of ink and paper :nook:
not even worth the paper they are published on …

Rab Rakha

DerVaisH

18

Storch, The point of this thread is the following - that if most Americans are anti-war (as you stated in your post), does that make them necessarily anti-American? And if not, then should the same apply towards those who are anti-war in this Forum? Why are they labelled as being anti-American?
[/QUOTE]

Being anti-war is certainly not anti-American. Being thoughtlessly anti-American at every opportunity, on every concievable issue could be anti-American or more likely just ignorant. There are many things America should be and has been held accountable for. Many things people would pin on the U.S. may at best be only partially true. i.e. the potential conflict is an oil grab (even Jimmy Carter sees that as absurd) or posts that tie all of Afghanistan's misery for the last 25 years to a justifiable intervention into that country. These notions are mostly ignorant, but motivated by anti-americanism as a philosophy. And a philosophy it has become-if only occasionally rooted in fact. If the facts meant anything there would be widespread anti-Chinese or anti-Russian groundswells worldwide. Anti-Sadaamism should justly take root in the world. Even anti-Pakistanism or anti Canadaism.

America has been top-dog militarily and economically for 50 some years. And before you think I'm going to say anti-Americanism is motivated by jealousy, I will say that America has become this epoch's de facto empire, mostly by accident and with the cooperation of the world at large. The conquests have largely been through financial influence and all nations and people enticed by what America had to offer are complicit in what America and western capitalism has come to represent to detractors around the world. People don't like empires after a while. It's lilely that had this empire not existed af far more insidious version of empire could have.

Many people on that list may be informed Americans who simply disagree with the notion of a forceful disarmament of Sadaam. So, no, opposing the war is not Anti-American by any means. It really depends on who's doing it and why. Some like to think of the matter of possible war with Sadaam as black or white. But the people responible for the safety of U.S. citizens have some real issues and concerns, that Robert Guillaume (Benson) and Melissa Gilbert (Shortcake) don't really seem to have fully grasped.

I heard John Kerry speak on the subject once (he backs a rigorous U.N. solution for Iraq). But his argument lacked the hyperbole of say a Jessica Lange-someone who sees the possible conflict as Bush's payback, Cheney's oil grab, extermination of Muslims or an economic boondoggle. His was a thoughtful position and I listened and learned. Not for a moment did I consider him anti-American.

Give some Americans credit, Nadia. We know the difference between a patriot and a poseur.

p.s. can I assume that since Gabe Kaplan is not on the list, he is a patriot?

19

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Nadia,

How does this make them anti-American and indicate that they loathe freedom and justice? They are actually enjoying the freedoms of democracy by their protests.

[/QUOTE]

Well said. It's funny how people get their undies in a knot about this dissent but have little to say about the violent crushing of dissent in the Arab world.

20

Storch, Thank you, interesting reply although i don't agree with parts of it but thank you for taking the time and thought to write it out.
>>Being thoughtlessly anti-American at every opportunity, on every concievable issue could be anti-American or more likely just ignorant.<<
So do you think that is what i am, anti-American at every opportunity?

We could discuss some of the aspects that the US should be and has been held accountable for, but i fear that would take us off-track. You mention that anti-Saddamism should "justly take root in the world", as well as anti-Pakistanism or anti Canadaism; why do you believe these have not taken root (or at least have not done so in a substantial manner)?

>>It's lilely that had this empire not existed af far more insidious version of empire could have.<<
But, IMHO, that doesn't justify anything, not the actions of the present empire.

>>So, no, opposing the war is not Anti-American by any means. It really depends on who's doing it and why.<<
Sorry, but what do you mean by the who part in that above sentence? As in nationality?

>>p.s. can I assume that since Gabe Kaplan is not on the list, he is a patriot?<<
There are a thousand names not on that list, who will still be patriots. The list isn't "the" ultimate list of American patriots. i have no idea of the process involved in obtaining all these signatures; who is to determine who was asked and who was not, or who was aware of this movement and who was not? When i stated earlier that the individuals who signed it are probably true patriots in the sense that they genuinely want their country to live up to noble ideals, it was not a suggestion that EACH individual who has not signed it, is unpatriotic.

ps- Regarding the argument that those who are thoughtlessly anti-American at every opportunity - possibly, theoretically, could the same apply to those whom i perceive of as being thoughtlessly anti-Muslim in the sense that the majority of conflicts being waged currently are against individuals of Muslim countries? And that those who endorse such conflicts are anti-Muslim? It's a very simplistic argument, i realize, and i do not for a second believe in its validity - but am including it simply to illustrate how erroneous the anti-American argument is as well (in my opinion).