I know, you expect me to write something searing about Tom Cruise. Really I can write about that later it's all pretty clear he deserved this from my previous posts. And I think Paramount did the absolute right thing. It makes perfect sense for the head of the board to come out on the issue and take the heat for the studio's CEO and management. And what makes it even better is the New Yokr Times article that sums it all up perfectly. But the nail in the coffin is that the other producers at Viacom were willing to back up the head of the studio.
I find it all fascinating because no matter how many other celebrities love you or back you up as a celebrity : AKA, Leah Remini, John Travolta, or Will Smith. It's the people with the money to fund your films that matter in Hollywood.
It's a PR fiasco gone unmanaged and un hinged. Damage control should have been done a year ago for his hits on Brooke Shields, Matt Lauer and the weird scientology stunts. I mean as weird as Scientology is none of the other Scientologists act quite this weird. John Travolta is still a man people like to watch twist, Leah Remini plays moms well on TV, it's all fine for them.
He should have come out and talked about how sensitive he is to women's issues after giving birth. How he loves women and would never want to downplay their feelings-that would be the women who make up his largest and most loyal audience. The Matt Lauer incident just drove how out there he is home to that once loyal demographic in case they tried to convince themselves otherwise. It's like someone created a targeted PR strategy to ruin his career with his core demographic money producing audience. Yes I know women in their 20's and 30's don't run to movies the way 14 yr olds do-but they have a cult like allegiance to certain stars. One of whom is no longer Tom Cruise.
The New York Times article basically asks the question why did Paramount sign cruise for Mission Impossible III. That's easy, a star as big as Cruise deserved a last chance and there was hope that he would recover, I mean he was once Joe Cool, Maverick, and he even pulled off the sexually homoerotic Lestat. But he just did not recover himself PR wise, he needed to do a big campaign sans the scientologists to show how considerate and sorry he was to his audience and fans. He didn't do it because he ultimately believes he was right ( I guess), hubris anyone??
But the weirdest stuff with Katie Holmes, the no account baby who I believe does not exist, why would you say do I think that?? Well I've never seen it, Katie Holmes stomache changed sizes daily getting bigger and then smaller, it looked like a prosthetic. And because Tom Cruise is gay. I say this because I have two sisters living in Hollywood since 1994 and they swear everyone says he is gay. They believe he is gay. The rumor has been around since the 1980's and I often tell people this piece of advice about Tom Cruise. "When tempted to ask yourself why does Tom Cruise act so weird? Why does he do Scientology? Why did he dump Nicole? Don't ponder, just say to yourself, TOM CRUISE IS GAY. HE's GAY, and if he would just admit it and deal with it instead of holding young starlets hostage to prove he's not-heck his career might improve...
I once loved Tom Cruise, he now makes me feel uncomfortable and embarassed for him.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
ANTI-SEMITIC ANTI WAR MOVEMENT????
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206576,00.html
The above link describes an interview with The Big Story With John Gibson, featuring Ariel Cohen a policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation and Brian Becker of the Answer Coalition. This article adequately describes the intrinsic hate on the part of the anti-war movement for Israel run mostly by ANSWER. The group has completely shifted its focus over the past year from wanting the world to be at peace which-you would think should include Israel's happiness-to anti-semitic blaming of Israel for the U.S's problems with terrorists.
A person may question why I would determine that it is anti-semitic on the part of ANSWER to take the side of Palistine, Iran, Hezbollah, or Al-Qaeda. Well these countries leaders and these groups specifically site Israel's existence-period-as a reason for their anger. Never mind that Palistine is a country that any number of Arab nations could help if they did not value it's agitation against Jews, that Iran's leader has stated that he wants to bring about the end of the world, that Hezbollah was founded and funded by the Iranians who hate Israel, and that Al Qaeda is run by extremists who couldn't survive in their home country of Saudi Arabia. My point is that Israel is not at fault for the insanity of these people and extremist groups.
Israel has done everything they can, especially under the dear Ariel Sharon who painfully withdrew his own people and troups from Gaza last Fall to no avail from these corrupt organizations that want nothing but complete demolition of Israel. And it's pretty hard to fault a country for trying to protect themselves. More importantly, ANSWER constantly says the people of Lebanon and Syria like Hezbollah. Well I am part Syrian and Lebanese and my family has traveled there many times and I can tell you that children and families just want to live their lives in peace. And there is no love for a group like Hezbollah which brings this war on them.
The crux of ANSWER's faulty logic is not that they hold Israel to be an equal partner in the conflict because they fight back aggressively. But that ANSWER maintains any action on the part of Israel to defend itself in a WAR is wrong. More importantly, they defend the action of Hezbollah, Iran, and pretty much any other terrorist group that goes after Israel. ANSWER can hold up Jewish peace activists as examples of Jewish disapproval of Israel, but anyone can express disapproval of a country's method for dealing with violence. Anyone can say 'I am not happy with how my country has dealt with this situation' that is completely different from saying that the country is a terrorist group when they defend themselves against people who are obviously terrorists.
I think someone needs to remind ANSWER what the definition of a terrorist is-Webster's anyone?
Worse yet, the group ANSWER is run by FENTON COMMUNICATIONS, that's right, the entire anti-war movement is funded by donor political money from the DNC, Dem lobbying groups, and run by the Left's powerhouse communications firm-FENTON COMMUNICATIONS. Just contact Fenton Communications or go to their website and you will find out the truth. They run Answer's campaigns and their parent groups campaigns.
Not from peace loving hippies who gather of their own free will like back in the 'glorious' 1960's Vietnam movement to smoke weed and practice free love.
And this leads to a disturbing thought, if the movement is run by a large communications firm like Fenton and sponsored by these Democrat donors. That means that this anti-semitic movement, which is what it is since it squarely blames Israel and the U.S. for supporting Israel, is sponsored with money from Jewish people since they are some of the biggest donors to the DNC, it's affiliated left groups and is institutionalized.
It should be no surprise that people like Mel Gibson in drunken stupors say crazy things about Israel-I mean he lives in Hollywood which is by definition soaked in the anti-semitic alcohol of the liberal anti-war movement. He's only saying what I have heard people in Hollywood say repeatedly never realizing the defunct logic and hate they were hashing out. Maybe it's a good thing.
It's definitely time for the Jewish people to reexamine their allegiance to the Democrats, the left, and the reality of the Anti-War movement.
The above link describes an interview with The Big Story With John Gibson, featuring Ariel Cohen a policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation and Brian Becker of the Answer Coalition. This article adequately describes the intrinsic hate on the part of the anti-war movement for Israel run mostly by ANSWER. The group has completely shifted its focus over the past year from wanting the world to be at peace which-you would think should include Israel's happiness-to anti-semitic blaming of Israel for the U.S's problems with terrorists.
A person may question why I would determine that it is anti-semitic on the part of ANSWER to take the side of Palistine, Iran, Hezbollah, or Al-Qaeda. Well these countries leaders and these groups specifically site Israel's existence-period-as a reason for their anger. Never mind that Palistine is a country that any number of Arab nations could help if they did not value it's agitation against Jews, that Iran's leader has stated that he wants to bring about the end of the world, that Hezbollah was founded and funded by the Iranians who hate Israel, and that Al Qaeda is run by extremists who couldn't survive in their home country of Saudi Arabia. My point is that Israel is not at fault for the insanity of these people and extremist groups.
Israel has done everything they can, especially under the dear Ariel Sharon who painfully withdrew his own people and troups from Gaza last Fall to no avail from these corrupt organizations that want nothing but complete demolition of Israel. And it's pretty hard to fault a country for trying to protect themselves. More importantly, ANSWER constantly says the people of Lebanon and Syria like Hezbollah. Well I am part Syrian and Lebanese and my family has traveled there many times and I can tell you that children and families just want to live their lives in peace. And there is no love for a group like Hezbollah which brings this war on them.
The crux of ANSWER's faulty logic is not that they hold Israel to be an equal partner in the conflict because they fight back aggressively. But that ANSWER maintains any action on the part of Israel to defend itself in a WAR is wrong. More importantly, they defend the action of Hezbollah, Iran, and pretty much any other terrorist group that goes after Israel. ANSWER can hold up Jewish peace activists as examples of Jewish disapproval of Israel, but anyone can express disapproval of a country's method for dealing with violence. Anyone can say 'I am not happy with how my country has dealt with this situation' that is completely different from saying that the country is a terrorist group when they defend themselves against people who are obviously terrorists.
I think someone needs to remind ANSWER what the definition of a terrorist is-Webster's anyone?
Worse yet, the group ANSWER is run by FENTON COMMUNICATIONS, that's right, the entire anti-war movement is funded by donor political money from the DNC, Dem lobbying groups, and run by the Left's powerhouse communications firm-FENTON COMMUNICATIONS. Just contact Fenton Communications or go to their website and you will find out the truth. They run Answer's campaigns and their parent groups campaigns.
Not from peace loving hippies who gather of their own free will like back in the 'glorious' 1960's Vietnam movement to smoke weed and practice free love.
And this leads to a disturbing thought, if the movement is run by a large communications firm like Fenton and sponsored by these Democrat donors. That means that this anti-semitic movement, which is what it is since it squarely blames Israel and the U.S. for supporting Israel, is sponsored with money from Jewish people since they are some of the biggest donors to the DNC, it's affiliated left groups and is institutionalized.
It should be no surprise that people like Mel Gibson in drunken stupors say crazy things about Israel-I mean he lives in Hollywood which is by definition soaked in the anti-semitic alcohol of the liberal anti-war movement. He's only saying what I have heard people in Hollywood say repeatedly never realizing the defunct logic and hate they were hashing out. Maybe it's a good thing.
It's definitely time for the Jewish people to reexamine their allegiance to the Democrats, the left, and the reality of the Anti-War movement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)