Bill Maher - The World IS Mel Gibson

[gulfcoastliberal]

I suspect I'll have plenty more to say about Mel Gibson when Real Time returns to HBO on August 25 (PLUG!!!), but in the meantime a couple of thoughts:

As I watch so much of the world ask Israel for restraint in a way no other country would (Can you imagine what Bush would do if a terrorist organization took over Canada and was lobbing missiles into Montana, Maine and Illinois?) - and, by the way, does anyone ever ask Hezbollah for
restraint. you know, like, please stop firing your rockets aimed PURPOSEFULLY at civilians? - it strikes me that the world IS Mel Gibson. Most of the time, the anti-semitism is under control, but that demon lives inside and when the moon is full, or there's been enough alcohol consumed,
or Israel is forced to kill people in its own defense, then it comes out.

I've heard Mr. Gibson say he's sorry, and that he's wrong, and others say, well, he was drunk, he's got a disease, etc. But my question is, what is the root of this, Mel? I mean, we all say crazy things when we're drunk, and we've all undoubtedly had ugly moments when we're superstressed out and then drunk on top of it, I know I have - but what comes out at that moment isn't a tirade against the Jews. Yes, liquor releases demons, but I want to know why the demon in Mel Gibson is hatred of the Jews to begin with (I know, the father). Why, when Mels's id is released, its about the Jews fucking everything up, just like it was with Hitler. Except Mel Gibson, when his id is in check, I believe, really knows how wrong that is, and how stupid. He, I believe, at least fights with himself about this.

But he'll never win as long as he's so religious, because, I hate to tell you, the disease isn't alcholism, the disease is religion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/the-world-is-mel-gibson_b_26315.html

[SharonRB]

1. I've been wondering when Real Time was returning

I was just thinking about it this morning, in fact. Now I know! Thanks.

[nam78_two]

2. I can no longer afford HBO :-/

I used to like his show....have no idea of its still good though..
I remember his 'Kobe Teeth' and "weapons of mass destruction related program activities" :rofl:
And the new rules...

[Lorien]

4. Listen to it for free via iTunes podcasts. n/t

[Hissyspit]

3. kicked and recommended

[Joe Chi Minh]

5. Bill Maher nailed it, 100%, in the main thrust of his article.

By waging war on the fledgling State of Israel and losing that war, her Arabic neighbours cemented the establishment of Israel as a nation, irrevocably.

However, instead of allowing the Palestinian people to come to terms with Israel, (which, were it not under perpetual siege, would be by far the most civilized and humane country in the world), the world's media - its proprietors, generally, being among the world's greatest malefactors - have never ceased to raise false hopes in the breasts of the whole Arabic world (not just the Palestinians) that public opinion would some day miraculously ensure that they prevailed over the Israelis and return, effectively as conquering heroes. That was apparently the explicit message peddled to the Palestinians by the surrounding Arabic countries, when the latter urged them to temporarily leave the country, before the Six-Day War in 1967.

If, indeed, public opinion could ever have brought about this reversal of the fortunes of the two nations, which the world - never previously known for its burning desire for geopolitical justice, by the way - so keenly desires, it might well be a very different story. Indeed, a new just world-order, achieved by purely secular means, would presumably be on the table.

Not that seeking to establish a new, more just world order is not a duty on all human beings; indeed, it is. But it has to start at home, in our own respective countries and in our own hearts.

I can only idly muse as to whether the rationale of the media magnates is simple anti-Semitism, whether they are themselves heavy investors in the armaments industry, or whether they wish to ingratiate themselves with the oil-rich Arabic world, or a combination of all three and/or more. But trouble-making and the media magnates go together like nothing else on earth.

Of course, the problem in Israel and Lebanon is now compounded by the US Government's virtually total identification with the interests of its own armaments manufacturers and big oil - in addition to big business, generally. War is a racket they can't get enough of. Ask Halliburton and Bechtel, to name just two interested parties.

Essentially, by far the greatest guilt and blame for all the slaughtered and maimed innocents in Palestine, Lebanon and Israel are to be found in the hearts of the media magnates of the West, and to a lesser extent, the Arabic politicians for allowing themselves to be misled by the latter.

[gulfcoastliberal]

7. A most excellent post.

Since my degree is inHistory, I do so admire posts that mention historic events and how they influenced the way the world is today. Thanks for a thoughtful, well reasoned post. One ofthe best I've read on DU in quite some time! Bravo. Bravo.

:toast: :yourock: :applause:

[Joe Chi Minh]

11. Thank you, gulfcoastliberal. Your plaudit is very gratifying to

read.

[calico1]

6. He's right. n/t

[megatherium]

8. Bill Maher is wonderful. He's exactly correct.

Many people here on DU don't seem to get it.

[Baselinereality]

9. Exactly correct, eh?

There are two types of people in the world: those that oppose what Hezbollah did to Israel and those that think that Israel's response was too destructive of Lebanon. (There, of course, is a third category of people who's response is "Reggie Bush settled his contract and is ready to begin training camp!"

Bill Maher is not unique with his commentary that Israel should bomb the f*ck out of Lebanon. He is unique only in the artistic community. But there are plenty of neo-cons that agree whole-heartedly with him. And, actually, there are more than a few artists that agree with him. Dennis Miller and Mel Gibson come to mind.

America has a wonderfully rich history dealing with oppression. We, having built our society on the backs of slave labor, should understand fully the danger of trying to suppress a people's rage by the barrel of a gun. Let's not even begin to admit that Lebanon has a burgeoning democratic government that dealt with several divergent religious sects.

I always have to fight the temptation to lecture people as I sit here and type. I don't know everything, and I'm probably wrong about a lot, but people that think that the answer to the problems of the world is to instigate wars in the Middle East are freakin' insane. It's just insanity. Now, granted, talking to Arabs and Persians as if they were actually human beings is probably no guarantee that they won't do something harmful to us in the future, but I think it's also a given that invading Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and I guess Syria and Iran will also not ensure our safety.

Bill Maher spoke out about the prospect of launching a war against Iraq. But, once we invaded he totally changed his tune. "Well, now that we're there, we might as well do it right." This most recent support of Israel's incursion of Lebanon is just more of the same madness.

Personally?

I think he's just sticking his neck out to take some heat off of Ann Coulter. I'm pretty sure that they are f*ck buddies. Which totally makes sense. For her, even though he doesn't agree with most of what she talks about, he's a man. And, for him, even though she is a skeleton, she is not a whore. Well, not when it comes to sex, anyways.

[Joe Chi Minh]

12. Well, my position on Iraq from the first moment the farcical lies to

justify it began to be peddled has been simply that we're imperialist aggressors, and they are resistance fighters, period. It's never been a knotty conundrum, but has just been made easier to grasp with each absurd new neocon lie. But it's a separate issue from the Israel-Lebanon one.

[megatherium]

13. In not so many words, you are accusing me of ignorance and racism.

Not very appreciated; nor your vulgar comments about the sexuality of Bill Maher and Ann Coulter.

[regnaD kciN]

14. So, any opinion counter to yours constitutes a personal attack?

I seriously recommend you get over yourself. Such tactics vary little from the right's labelling of antiwar activists as "America-haters."

And if you find my comments offensive, so be it.

[megatherium]

16. I'm sorry if I offended you, or the original poster.

I think I overreacted to what I took as a patronizing tone in his post, which I doubt was intended.

[Catfight]

10. I don't believe Mel knows how stupid it is, I believe he really has

a deep hate for Jews. He's more then an alcoholic, he's a religious nutcase.

[regnaD kciN]

15. An incredibly stupid comment from Maher...

As I watch so much of the world ask Israel for restraint in a way no other country would (Can you imagine what Bush would do if a terrorist organization took over Canada and was lobbing missiles into Montana, Maine and Illinois?)

Let's take this step by step, shall we?

1) Hezbollah has not "taken over Lebanon" (which is under a newly-formed pro-U.S. civilian leadership), so his analogy to a terrorist organization "taking over Canada" is nonsense to begin with.

2) Instead of assuming "what Bush would do," what about assuming what a hypothetical mature and responsible U.S. President would do? I doubt that there are many here who think Bush would do anything other than act in the most stupid, warlike manner imaginable.

3) To state the obvious: Hezbollah didn't begin "lobbing missles" before Israel launched an all-out assault on Lebanese civilians and Lebanese infrastructure in response to the capturing of two Israeli soldiers. The war didn't begin with Hezbollah rocket strikes. Let's keep the timeline and chain of causality clear.

So, let's rework the analogy somewhat more accurately. Suppose that a hardline Roman Catholic organization emerged in Quebec, unconnected and in opposition to the national and provincial governments, devoted to the goal of "winning North America back to the One True Church" by force of arms, if necessary. This group (let's call it "The Brotherhood of God"), with substantial but not universal popularity in the villages of southern Quebec, began minor skirmishes along the U.S./Quebec border. On one of those raids, they capture a couple of U.S. border guards and hold them hostage somewhere in the North Woods, demanding the release of other Brotherhood of God members arrested by the U.S. during previous raids.

Would a mature and responsible U.S. President respond to this by immedately bombing every airport in Canada, instituting a naval blockade of that nation, destroying portions of the Trans-Canada Highway and other major road links necessary for Canadian commerce, and wiping out large sections of the suburbs of Toronto? (Actually, this analogy is still biased in favor of the U.S./Israeli position, for it is safe to guess that the Canadian military would have the strength to go after the Brotherhood of God if they wished, while all independent observers agree that the newly-formed Lebanese government is yet unable to do the same to Hezbollah. Nonetheless, let us continue.)

And if the U.S. had actually responded in such a disproportional and illogical manner, and then the Brotherhood of God had started firing small-scale rockets into Vermont and New Hampshire (getting "lucky" when a couple of them resulted in a handful of civilian deaths in Burlington), would we have intensified our attacks by bombing Ottawa, Vancouver, Halifax, and Calgary, all the while rejecting calls for a cease-fire on the grounds that "no other nation on earth would be asked to show restraint in such a case"...?

I don't think so.

And I think that, had we pursued such a policy, we would be rightly regarded as a pariah among nations.

And all the bluster from an idiot such as Maher would not suffice to change that.