Angelina Jolie tries to ban Foxnews

[Lynn7]

Angelina Jolie's Freedom of Press, on Her Terms

Angelina Jolie's true colors came out Wednesday as she promoted a film about freedom of the press and then tried to censor all her interviews.

Jolie is touting press freedom these days, playing the widow of murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in a new movie called "A Mighty Heart."

But Jolie turns out to be a mighty hypocrite when it comes to her own freedom of the press. Her lawyer required all journalists to sign a contract before talking to her, and Jolie instructed publicists at first to ban FOX News from the red carpet of her premiere.

Ironically, Wednesday night's premiere of the excellent Michael Winterbottom-directed film was meant to support an organization called Reporters Without Borders. Jolie, however, did everything she could to clamp down on the press and control it.

Reporters from most major media outlets balked Wednesday when they were presented with an agreement drawn up by Jolie's Hollywood lawyer Robert Offer. The contract closely dictated the terms of all interviews.

Reporters were asked to agree to "not ask Ms. Jolie any questions regarding her personal relationships. In the event Interviewer does ask Ms. Jolie any questions regarding her personal relationships, Ms. Jolie will have the right to immediately terminate the interview and leave."

The agreement also required that "the interview may only be used to promote the Picture. In no event may Interviewer or Media Outlet be entitled to run all or any portion of the interview in connection with any other story. ... The interview will not be used in a manner that is disparaging, demeaning, or derogatory to Ms. Jolie."

If that wasn't enough, Jolie also requires that if any of these things happen, "the tape of the interview will not be released to Interviewer." Such a violation, the signatory thus agrees, would "cause Jolie irreparable harm" and make it possible for her to sue the interviewer and seek a restraining order.

I am told that USA Today and the Associated Press were among those that canceled interviews, and eventually Jolie scotched all print interviews when she heard the reaction.

"I wouldn't sign it," a reporter for a major outlet said. "Who does she think she is?"

A call to Offer was apparently one that could be refused. He didn't return calls. An associate, Lindsay Strasberg, said, before hanging up: "You're a reporter? I can't talk to reporters. Goodbye."

So much for reporters without borders.

That's not all: Jolie told Paramount Pictures publicists to ban FOX News Channel and all FOX News affiliates from covering the "Mighty Heart" premiere on the red carpet. It was only with the intervention of mortified Paramount staff that an FNC camera crew was allowed to be present.

Apparently, no one told Jolie of the highly positive review FOX News had given "A Mighty Heart" from Cannes.

Jolie is famous by now for directing press and selling rights to her photos. She has long been in business with People magazine, orchestrating photo shoots of her children. The money, she says, goes to charity.

This column reported a year ago, on June 8, 2006, about how Jolie and Pitt were responsible for the expulsion of journalists in Namibia where the couple went to have their child, Shiloh. Their bodyguards regularly got into fights with local photographers hoping to make some money from the couple's colonial residency in their country.

After Shiloh was born, Jolie and Pitt gave a news conference, but limited it only to Namibian journalists. No reporters from neighboring countries were allowed.

The couple sat on the dais with Sam Nujoma, Namibia's first president, aka dictator, who ruled for 15 years.

In 2002, Nujoma abruptly appointed himself minister of information and broadcasting. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Nujoma has routinely attacked reporters from his country calling them "unpatriotic" and "the enemy."

During the time Pitt and Jolie were in the country, a former photographer for the Namibian, the daily newspaper, was arrested twice for trying to get a picture of the couple.

South African John Liebenberg was arrested on municipal property during the Jolie-Pitt stay and pronounced guilty of trespassing. His passport and camera equipment were confiscated as well.

Treatment of the press is so bad in Namibia, in fact, that an organization called the National Society for Human Rights was formed several years ago to protect reporters' rights.

The NSHR, which is usually busy with more important matters, issued a statement on April 24 strongly condemning the deportation of foreign journalists from Namibia who wanted to cover the Pitt-Jolie visit.

"As the principal human rights monitoring and advocacy organization in this country, we strongly repudiate this unprecedented and blatant violation of the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and expression, which includes freedom of the press and other media," the statement read.

It's a little unclear how Mariane Pearl, whom Jolie plays in "A Mighty Heart," feels about her portrayer's position on freedom of press for some, but not all. On Wednesday, I spoke to Jeff Julliard, the editorial director of Reporters Without Borders in Paris.

"Paparazzi should be allowed to do their job," he said, adding that he condemned Jolie's banning of FOX News and actions taken on her behalf in Namibia.

__________________________________________________

I love the orchestrated effort by people on the left to shut out Fox News. From the presidential debates to celebrities like Jolie joining efforts to shut out Fox because they do not approve of the way they cover the news. I just love it. Actions speak louder than words. Freedom of the press, right? And don't ask any questions that I do not want to answer or I will get up and leave the interview or worse. Yeesh! Can't she just say she doens't want to answer certain questions to the interviewers' faces? That's usually how it is done. Now she can just try to sterilize the interview ahead of time. I'm glad the AP and USAToday didn't go for it. It showed some backbone. LAck of freedom of the press begins with the ostracism of Fox news but where does it end?

And how about Broward County in Florida who does not want to air hurricane info on radio stations that play Rush Limbaugh's show. Anything disturbing to any of you about this stuff? Do you see the metaphorical storm coming?

Here is the link to the Jolie story:
Article (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,282173,00.html)

[MadsenOMC]

So the AG scandal is no big deal, but this is? You have no credibility here Lynn so excuse me if I don't take you seriously here. You ignore important issues and yet you're outraged by this? Please. Give me a break.

[Lynn7]

Resrtiction of the press is indeed a very minor issue. Please excuse me.

[MadsenOMC]

Oh give me a break Lynn. The politicizing of the Justice Department is a huge deal yet you blow it off. Like I said, you seriously lack credibility here.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

She could always adopt Fox News....

[Scarfather]

FOX News is, and I am convinced that as far as the management remains the same, will always be, a bog of greasy, smarmy pundits whose souls are practically owned in toto by the bloodsuckers who control the network.

But..

Angelina Jolie, not more then five years ago, carried a vile of Billy Bob Thornton's blood around her neck, her facade of worldliness is laughable, and she should stick to her lesbian TV movies and Tomb Raider rather then ludicrously masquerade herself as a respectable actress.

All the actresses I have truly admired are humble, grateful, and in many cases, role-models, not prima donna tools.

[MadsenOMC]

Essentially what this boils down to is an actress refusing to talk to Fox News. Hardly a matter of grave concern, but it gives Lynn the opportunity to bash the media and the left and make blanket statements. It's hilarious and sad and disturbing that she thinks this is a big deal but the AG scandal isn't.

[Scarfather]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
It's hilarious and sad and disturbing that she thinks this is a big deal but the AG scandal isn't.

I'm not familiar with this, but given Lynn's posts en masse, I am not surprised.

[Silverload]

This is ridiculous that such an absurd story made real news. Sad times I tells you.

[Thrizzle]

Fox News admits that it's propoganda. They're no more part of the press corp than any tabloid.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Resrtiction of the press is indeed a very minor issue. Please excuse me.

Jolie is not trying to decrease freedom of press. She simple wants to choose to whom she gives interviews, and what are the terms of those interviews. A movie premiere is a private event, all media needs to be accredited to event like these, it's never a free party for everyone who wants to attend.

Frankly, this is her private business and it's not hypocrisy in any sense. It can be argued that it might not be smart in terms of marketing the movie, but that's between her and the studio. If I were a studio head, I would be upset by her behaviour, because it could potentially damage the movie.

But I can see Jolie's point of view easily: She is trying to protect herself from the blood-sucking leeches, that the majority of entertainment reporters are. However, I don't think this approach is going to serve her well.

[The Postmaster General]

As has been stated by more articulate men, Jolie is not banning Fox news, she is exercising her freedom to talk to whomever she damn well please.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Bush select what questions he can and can't be asked during press conferences? Don't you remember him refusing to answer specific questions after his reelection, citing "will of the people" that he only has to answer what he wants to answer.

Oops. I guess you forgot about that one.

[Lynn7]

Yeah, I do remember that and that he was kidding.But he can't joke cause it is always used against him.
Jolie has the right to refuse to allow Foxnews to interview her. She has the right to say she will get up if any organization asks her anything that she does not want to ask. And the Democratic presidential candidates have the right to shun Fox news from hosting their debates. And the Broward County board has the right to choose which radio network will carry the hurricane warnings (although they have since backtracked under intense public outcry). So, I can see it is ok with you guys that there is a movement to ostracize people who have opposing political opinions- I guess it explains the current climate.

You will have to see in the future how it all works out. I'm sure everything will be fine. There will surely be no slippery slope in this - we will never be like North Korea where they are executing people for cell phone use. (They don't want people hearing from the outside world where different opinions might be heard). We are much better than people like that, aren't we? Or are we?

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Lynn7
We are much better than people like that, aren't we? Or are we?

Damn, could you be more dramatic? Comparing someone not wanting to be interviewed by a news outlet that they don't agree with to people getting killed for cell phone use in North Korea has no logical connection. If a conservative like James Woods, for instance, decided not to be interviewed by CNN because of a perceived liberal bias I don't think you'd be comparing it to fucking North Korea.

[MadsenOMC]

Conservatives and their "slippery slope" bullshit. When in doubt, or if you have no logical argument, just say slippery slope. Lynn, your bias is hilarious and ridiculous. You only have something negative to say if it concerns the left. So you ignore the very serious AG scandal while getting all bent out of shape because a celebrity doesn't want to talk to a propoganda machine masquerading as a news outlet. Brando makes a great point about all this as well. You are hysterical Lynn.

[Tuukka]

On a sidenote, ALL celebrities are picky to whom they give interviews. Celebrities have an image to guard, so they choose only to do media outlets that are beneficial to that image. This is one of the many reasons they have promoters - They need a guardians to pick up which medias will get the interviews, and which will not.

Intentionally ignoring certain medias and refusing to give interviews to them is something that basicly all celebrities do. Jolie is pushing it to more extreme than your average celebrity, but the basic principle remains the same.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
You are hysterical Lynn.

It's just that you are so calm and laid back that I look hysterical in comparison. Have you heard the phrase that history repeats itself? Do you remember what the world was saying in pre-Hitler days? They were minimizing the threat. It gave them a false sense of security. We are doing the same thing in the face of the rise of terrorism. And this movie Jolie was promoting is about a journalist who is killed while doing his job. Beheaded. And she uses this premiere as a time to pick and choose which news outlets can come and what they can ask her. I guess Jolie kind of missed the point of the movie. She must've been too focused on learning her lines.


Freedom of the press is something that is not enjoyed in most countries. It is obviously something you take for granted. Freedom of the press is not always removed in one action but in a series of small actions.

Gee, Russia is going through a sort of press crisis right now. Is that passive enough for you?

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by Lynn7
It's just that you are so calm and laid back that I look hysterical in comparison. Have you heard the phrase that history repeats itself? Do you remember what the world was saying in pre-Hitler days? They were minimizing the threat. It gave them a false sense of security. We are doing the same thing in the face of the rise of terrorism. And this movie Jolie was promoting is about a journalist who is killed while doing his job. Beheaded. And she uses this premiere as a time to pick and choose which news outlets can come and what they can ask her. I guess Jolie kind of missed the point of the movie. She must've been too focused on learning her lines.


Freedom of the press is something that is not enjoyed in most countries. It is obviously something you take for granted. Freedom of the press is not always removed in one action but in a series of small actions.

Gee, Russia is going through a sort of press crisis right now. Is that passive enough for you?

Like it was already said, Jolie is not trying to decrease the freedom of press. So your whole argument comes off as completely irrational.

[MadsenOMC]

Exactly. It is not a freedom of the press issue. This is a celebrity choosing to not talk to a news outlet. So boycott her movies if you're that upset about it. To compare a movie star's refusal to speak to one news outlet with Russia and Nazis is insane.

[QUENTIN]

As has already been stated, Jolie has neither the authority nor the ability to ban any news network. She's an actress, she has no power.

You toss out words like "ban" and equate an actress deciding she doesn't want a propagandistic network that on a daily basis intentionally distorts stories and misrepresents people and events to attend her premiere or interview her with the execution of people who seek information. First off, it's not about political viewpoints, it's about a lack of journalistic integrity, that's why Fox News faces opposition. It has nothing to do with silencing opposing viewpoints (particularly when that viewpoint is the common one in the U.S.) and everything to do with the fact that Fox News is ultimately not a news network, but a commentary and advocacy network masquerading as a news channel. They're just an extension of the White House Press Secretary's office. Anyone who understands and appreciates real press and journalism has a fundamental problem with Fox News' tactics. Secondly, this is a celebrity PR decision and has NOTHING to do with freedom of the press or any of the histrionic melodrama you're presenting it as. You're really grapsing at straws at this point.

If you had a real concern for the freedom of the press, you'd be opposed to the Bush Administration's ban on independent journalists covering the war in Afghanistan. Most of us here care immensely for the rights guaranteed us in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but it's the current administration that is a constant threat to those rights, not Angelina fucking Jolie. Get a grip.

[Lynn7]

Please show me an article from a fairly objective news source about how independent journalists are being banned by the Bush administration. I haven't heard anything about this and I would like to look into your charge.

As I tired to look into it I found this at USINFO.state.gov

"Reporters Without Borders said other journalists, including reporters from the Washington Post and the Miami Herald, also were turned back at the Havana airport. The group said that since the announcement of Castro's illness, Cuban embassies have refused to issue visas or have not responded to journalists' requests.

The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in its August 3 statement that it had urged Cuban authorities to allow foreign journalists to cover "this story of worldwide importance. Authorities should immediately expedite journalist visas so the international press can report authoritatively on this historic moment."

The CPJ said little is known about Castro's illness, other than he underwent surgery for intestinal bleeding, as Cuba's government announced. Castro handed power temporarily to his younger brother, Raúl, who has stayed out of public sight.

The Bush administration’s recently announced expanded support for Cuba's opposition leaders that would move Cuba away from dictatorship includes continuing efforts to break the Cuban regime's blockade of its people access to independent information.

In its "Second Report to the President of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba," released July 10, the Bush administration said Cubans continue to be imprisoned for such activities as "reading and viewing what they wish," and for "accessing information from the outside world, including the Internet."

The report recommended expanded efforts to "support the training and equipping of independent print, radio, and TV journalists in Cuba and improve their capacity and capability to inform the world and the Cuban people of events in Cuba."

it seems like the Bush admin beleives in freedom of the press. I would be surprised to hear that they were trying to stop journalists from covering issues. They were the ones who also okayed journalists to be on the tanks in Iraq and the journalists are over there right now too, as well as in Afghanistan.

So here is an article I found that may explain the reason why independent journalists are being banned. They are being targetted and killed.



Article (http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=61705)

[shoe1985]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
So the AG scandal is no big deal, but this is? You have no credibility here Lynn so excuse me if I don't take you seriously here. You ignore important issues and yet you're outraged by this? Please. Give me a break.

I am not the biggest Lynn fan, but I do like her arguments. It is good to have someone on the other side of the issues and voice their opinions.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Please show me an article from a fairly objective news source about how independent journalists are being banned by the Bush administration. I haven't heard anything about this and I would like to look into your charge.

As I tired to look into it I found this at USINFO.state.gov

"Reporters Without Borders said other journalists, including reporters from the Washington Post and the Miami Herald, also were turned back at the Havana airport. The group said that since the announcement of Castro's illness, Cuban embassies have refused to issue visas or have not responded to journalists' requests.

The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in its August 3 statement that it had urged Cuban authorities to allow foreign journalists to cover "this story of worldwide importance. Authorities should immediately expedite journalist visas so the international press can report authoritatively on this historic moment."

The CPJ said little is known about Castro's illness, other than he underwent surgery for intestinal bleeding, as Cuba's government announced. Castro handed power temporarily to his younger brother, Raúl, who has stayed out of public sight.

The Bush administration’s recently announced expanded support for Cuba's opposition leaders that would move Cuba away from dictatorship includes continuing efforts to break the Cuban regime's blockade of its people access to independent information.

In its "Second Report to the President of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba," released July 10, the Bush administration said Cubans continue to be imprisoned for such activities as "reading and viewing what they wish," and for "accessing information from the outside world, including the Internet."

The report recommended expanded efforts to "support the training and equipping of independent print, radio, and TV journalists in Cuba and improve their capacity and capability to inform the world and the Cuban people of events in Cuba."

it seems like the Bush admin beleives in freedom of the press. I would be surprised to hear that they were trying to stop journalists from covering issues. They were the ones who also okayed journalists to be on the tanks in Iraq and the journalists are over there right now too, as well as in Afghanistan.

So here is an article I found that may explain the reason why independent journalists are being banned. They are being targetted and killed.



Article (http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=61705)

I can't explain the Washington Post but I've got a very good explanation as to why Miami Herald journalists are being banned from Cuba.

Miami is the home to millions of Cuban refugees. They have a very strong political voice in the city and some surrounding areas when it comes to Cuba and Fidel Castro.

Illeana Ross-Lethin and Lincoln Diaz-Balart are repeatedly voted back into Congress by an overwhelming Cuban majority (so overwhelming that for many years Lincoln Diaz-Balart has ran unopposed for a number of years). These politicians are either refugees or the children of refugees and carry with them the hatred for Fidel Castro. They're part of the group of politicians that created the embargo against Cuba that stands today.

The power of the political Cubans is SOOO overwhelming that when Bill Clinton gave the order to "retrieve" Elian Gonzalez, the only Miami city official that was notified of the plan was the Police Commissioner, who was not Cuban. The mayor was Cuban and was not notified by either federal or local officials for fear that he would notify Cuban groups of the raid (he had participated in Cuban protests in the past despite criticisms about a mayor taking active involvement in a political protest).

Then there was the time "Los Van Van", a music group based in Cuba was allowed to tour the US, particularly Miami. This was significant because in order for a Cuban citizen to travel outside the country they need government permission. So to the Cuban exiles this band was basically touring with a stamp of approval from Fidel Castro. Cuban exiles protested outside the event and were so consumed with vitriol that some resorted to throwing bottles at the concert attendees, some with freaking children!!


And then of course there was that Brothers to the Rescue plane that flew directly into Cuban airspace and was shot down.

This is part of the reason why I moved away from Miami and I believe just some of the examples why Castro doesn't allow Miami Herald reporters into Cuba.


As for Cubans being punished for "reading and viewing what they wish," and for "accessing information from the outside world, including the Internet." I find that interesting considering recently Cubans have had the freedom to have public meetings discussing democracy outdoors in broad daylight without the police barging in and arresting participators.

And yes the Bush administration has tried to manipulate the news.

It was a couple years ago but there was the case of Armstrong Williams, a journalist who had clearly been paid off by federal agencies of this administration, here's a link:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0217/p01s01-uspo.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/26/politics/main669432.shtml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1401211,00.html

http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/01/bush_administra.html

"Federal law prohibits the use of federal money for "publicity or propaganda purposes" not authorized by Congress. In the past, the General Accounting Office has found that federal agencies violated this restriction when they disseminated editorials and newspaper articles written by the government or its contractors without identifying the source."

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by shoe1985
I am not the biggest Lynn fan, but I do like her arguments. It is good to have someone on the other side of the issues and voice their opinions.


I'm worried that we'll scare her off. I mean, I know she's taken a lot of abuse but it's gotten pretty bad as of late.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Resrtiction of the press is indeed a very minor issue. Please excuse me.

Restricting the press is a violation of the first amendment...


...wait a minute...


...wouldn't an Attorney General firing a list of full time permanent employees based on their politifcal views a violation of their first amendment???

Wow. Lives get ruined, you call that "wacky" and "silly". Yet you write a whole thread because Fox News doesn't get a story about an actress.

[EVILxxx]

This movie must really suck.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
I'm worried that we'll scare her off. I mean, I know she's taken a lot of abuse but it's gotten pretty bad as of late.

That woman's been here for years now and constantly puts forth the most appalingly ridiculous views I've ever seen, then uses either repetitive, appaling ridiculous logic to defend it, or worse yet, simply pretends it wasn't there. She's also ridiculously biased and much more forgiving for people or ideas on her side than she is for the other side. If you destroyed her intial argument in a thread, she'd simply use dummy ones, and you could damn well be sure she'd use the exact same one whenever the topic would come up. She even stated that she was right when I had flat-out proven that she wasn't.

The fact the board mandated we respect her when in fact she debated like a 3-year old made her alot of enemies here because we could never flip out at her enraging debate style lest we end up like Gredron. However I think it's a little telling when another christian who voted for Bush in '04 and a goddamn moderator are starting to lose their temper over her.

I fell off the wagon involving her recently and started posted again. What did she do when I did? She used the same arguments she used 3 years ago, despite the fact that looked even more retarded now than they did back then. I'm tired of all this. If she wants to earn my respect, she has to make massive reforms to her debating style, not simply her political views.

[EVILxxx]

This is madness!

[Vong]

Originally posted by EVILxxx
This is madness!

THIS IS POLITICS!

[MacReady]

Originally posted by EVILxxx
This is madness!

Actually, I enjoyed the good debate with you and outsyder as both of your views were quite sane and your reasoning was at least understandable, if that makes you feel any better.

[The Postmaster General]

I confronted Lynn on these boards long, long ago, and everyone was like, "Oh no! You're going to get banned. Why'd you yell at Lynn, Dude? Hey Walt, what's wrong with Bubba? Hey, Bubba, you're phone is ringing."

I wasn't even insulting, just accused her of coming off like a troll - seeming to want to infuriate more than debate. But everyone was like, "What? No! The Rules!" And all I really did was pointed out her debates were circular and encouraged everyone to ease off her and just try ignoring her. That was it.

So I don't want to hear any bellyaching. Let's drop it. Whether or not she debates to our liking or not, she doesn't continuously use the most insulting words imaginable to describe our points.

Put people on ignore, just don't respond, or whatever --- Really, the whining is more nerving to me than any one single poster on these boards. I gave you people an out, Grebdron gave an out, and everyone rallied to support Lynn --- I think that speaks more than Lynn does. Deep down I think we all know she's, at the least, respectful to us, albeit infuriatingly impossible to have a straight conversation with.

Here is the pervious thread I referenced: http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87652&highlight=troll

That's why I wanted to take a stand over all this painfully hateful stereotyping. Republicans are greedy? Democrats are wimps? It goes on and on with the stuff I've heard people NEEDLESSLY stand up agaist. And I'm not just pulling stuff out of my ear here -- I can go through and find actual examples that for some reason people don't take a stand against because they are under the misimpression that because political discussions get heated, it's okay for people to flat-out-and-out be disrespectful towards you and your party. People go way over the top with the hatefulness here, and in a way that would make those guys on Crossfire call foul.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

^^^^

I agree. And furthermore, I probably would have stopped coming here a long time ago if it weren't for my love of arguing with her.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I confronted Lynn on these boards long, long ago, and everyone was like, "Oh no! You're going to get banned. Why'd you yell at Lynn, Dude? Hey Walt, what's wrong with Bubba? Hey, Bubba, you're phone is ringing."

I wasn't even insulting, just accused her of coming off like a troll - seeming to want to infuriate more than debate. But everyone was like, "What? No! The Rules!" And all I really did was pointed out her debates were circular and encouraged everyone to ease off her and just try ignoring her. That was it.

So I don't want to hear any bellyaching. Let's drop it. Whether or not she debates to our liking or not, she doesn't continuously use the most insulting words imaginable to describe our points.

Put people on ignore, just don't respond, or whatever --- Really, the whining is more nerving to me than any one single poster on these boards. I gave you people an out, Grebdron gave an out, and everyone rallied to support Lynn --- I think that speaks more than Lynn does. Deep down I think we all know she's, at the least, respectful to us, albeit infuriatingly impossible to have a straight conversation with.

Here is the pervious thread I referenced: http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87652&highlight=troll

Good point, but I find it impossible to respect her when she's on over 75% of the threads, constantly repeating the same stuff she's been laughed at. I think the forum started to have a breakdown when she started downplaying the horrors of the 50's (and as a result, lynching itself).

Still, I think I was better off keeping my mouth shut. Good advice Bubba. I just hope I remember to use it this time.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I confronted Lynn on these boards long, long ago, and everyone was like, "Oh no! You're going to get banned. Why'd you yell at Lynn, Dude? Hey Walt, what's wrong with Bubba? Hey, Bubba, you're phone is ringing."

I wasn't even insulting, just accused her of coming off like a troll - seeming to want to infuriate more than debate. But everyone was like, "What? No! The Rules!" And all I really did was pointed out her debates were circular and encouraged everyone to ease off her and just try ignoring her. That was it.

So I don't want to hear any bellyaching. Let's drop it. Whether or not she debates to our liking or not, she doesn't continuously use the most insulting words imaginable to describe our points.

Put people on ignore, just don't respond, or whatever --- Really, the whining is more nerving to me than any one single poster on these boards. I gave you people an out, Grebdron gave an out, and everyone rallied to support Lynn --- I think that speaks more than Lynn does. Deep down I think we all know she's, at the least, respectful to us, albeit infuriatingly impossible to have a straight conversation with.


People weren't really supporting Lynn at all. Folks around here just like you too much to see you banned, and same went mostly for Grebron.

Personally, I think Lynn isn't respectful towards other people. This is a place for debate, and I find her debate tactics are rather disrespectful. The worst offender is that when she is proven wrong, she simply intentionally ignores the other side's arguments. Other people put a lot of work into giving a good, long, well backed-up arguments and she IGNORES them when she realizes she's been caught. And this happens all them time. That's disrespectful. But she doesn't do name-calling, so she is not breaking the rules.

Anyway, this discussion is the kind of "drama school" discussion that Joblo doesn't approve any more than insulting behaviour, so I better leave it at here.

[Vong]

Who is this Grebdon? Must have been some guy to get himself banned from the boards....

[jeo4]

Originally posted by jeo4
Restricting the press is a violation of the first amendment...


...wait a minute...


...wouldn't an Attorney General firing a list of full time permanent employees based on their political views a violation of their first amendment???

Wow. Lives get ruined, you call that "wacky" and "silly". Yet you write a whole thread because Fox News doesn't get a story about an actress.

[MacReady]

@Tuukka: I hate to come off as a weather-wane, but I truly agree with your post more. Bubba is right in that we should try and avoid getting into hate-filled arguements with her, but your right and that cleverly manipulates things so that she can anger people without breaking, thus creating many infuriating arguments (don't get me started on her seemingly endless web of hypcocrisy involving all the inherent contradictions of all her views)

@Vong: Grebdron was a very popular schmoe who was with us for a long time and nearly had 10,000 posts. He was fiercely anti-Johnny Depp, adored Charlize Theron, along with being an atheist, a former-soldier, and a guy who spent lots of time in the celeb forum and the yay-or-nay zone discussing celebrities (he lived in California and apparently encountered at least a few of them). He started posting a bit in th politics forum, but a few of the opinions by Lynn simply drove him mad, and, in a very nasty moment, said more than the moderators were willing to tolerate. (http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=92143&perpage=40&highlight=&pagenumber=1) I still miss him.

@Jeo: You're wasting your time. She's ditched debates where she was cornered many times, like my Apartheid vs. Clinton question I asked her recently.

[Vong]

Originally posted by MacReady
He started posting a bit in th politics forum, but a few of the opinions by Lynn simply drove him mad, and, in a very nasty moment, said more than the moderators were willing to tolerate. (http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=92143&perpage=40&highlight=&pagenumber=1) I still miss him.

Lynn certainly has a way with people.
I would have liked to have known Grebdron....it's a shame he got the boot.

I guess it's a lesson to us all: when Lynn starts to piss you off, take a breather and think of the joys in your life :rolleyes:

[The Postmaster General]

Well, here's the thing.... The reason I initially called her out was because I found her to be somewhat disrespectful. That was why I "went off" the way I did. I went on to put her on ignore. Namely, I was frustrated with her pigeon-holing other posters (mostly me) based on our affiliations more than our actual arguments. You could give her a 5,000 word dissertation on the history of abortion, and she would respond with, well, you know....

Do you know why she's not on my ignore list anymore? Because over 90% of the posts here are responses to her. The threads became quite confusing.

Just a little more perspective to share. :D

A little FYI - Grebdron is posting regularly at the RT forums last I talked to him. He tried to get me to walk with him, but I told him one password was simply too many to remember. Sadly, though, I do miss his presence and his posts. Vong, he had your sense of avatars.

[Lynn7]

I don't know why you are all talking about me like I am not around to read it. But, many of you have made yourselves very clear.

For the record, I have specific principles that I apply to all issues. If I sound repetetive in my arguments it is because I apply everything back to my Christian beliefs. I may not respond to all arguments in every thread but you guys don't always do that either. There are many things I have said that go unresponded to.

I have always tried to be respectful to other posters (although not to the political leaders I have criticized) and have never reported anyone for abuse and had even written on Grebdron's behalf so he would not be banned.

I kind of thought even though we all argued that we liked each other but I see now that I was naive. I can see most of you will be glad to see me go but although I will miss coming here that I will not be missed. :(

[MadsenOMC]

IMO Lynn, you are not a true Christian. Not by my definition of the word. People like you claim to be Christian, but when it comes down to it I don't think you truly are one. Reading your posts here, I get the impression that you never consider both sides of an issue and fail to see complexity in life. I know you mean no harm and I'm sure that you believe you are a good person. You just need to read more than Fox News and White House press releases.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I don't know why you are all talking about me like I am not around to read it. But, many of you have made yourselves very clear.

For the record, I have specific principles that I apply to all issues. If I sound repetetive in my arguments it is because I apply everything back to my Christian beliefs. I may not respond to all arguments in every thread but you guys don't always do that either. There are many things I have said that go unresponded to.

I have always tried to be respectful to other posters (although not to the political leaders I have criticized) and have never reported anyone for abuse and had even written on Grebdron's behalf so he would not be banned.

I kind of thought even though we all argued that we liked each other but I see now that I was naive. I can see most of you will be glad to see me go but although I will miss coming here that I will not be missed. :(



This might be how Angelina Jolie felt about Fox News.

[Thrizzle]

Can we start a new topic? I mean come on i get it already, everyones sorry blah blah now lets move on and discuss immigration or tort reform or something. That stuff is exciting.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

I think it's hilarious that everybody attacks Lynn for being close minded yet everybody here is much worse. I'm going to stop coming here as well because you're all so fucking intolerant it makes me sick. We may share some of the same political views, but when it comes to morality I have a bunch of questions about some of you (note: I'm not talking about Bubba and others like Bubba).

[Vong]

I still don't think it's possible to be intolerant of the intolerant....

[The Postmaster General]

Vong: Just Be.

Didn't they teach you that in hippie school? :D

[Criminal Rock]

this thread is so :rolleyes:

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Tai Mai Jew
this thread is so :rolleyes:


Over the top? Pretty much.


I won't leave this forum as long as we can find ONE conservative (John doesn't count because he doesn't post that often) that we can have a serious, mature debate with.....one that doesn't end up with someone posting pictures of black people getting lynched or someone accusing someone else of being intolerant.

[Vong]

Brando has officially become this forum's drama queen. :rolleyes:

And Bubba, I'll thank you not to call York a "hippie school" :p

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Vong
Brando has officially become this forum's drama queen. :rolleyes:

And Bubba, I'll thank you not to call York a "hippie school" :p


HA! I am far from the most dramatic person here. Just look at some of these other posts.

[EVILxxx]

Vong are you going for the Golden Schmoe for most eye rolls?

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Lynn7
For the record, I have specific principles that I apply to all issues. If I sound repetetive in my arguments it is because I apply everything back to my Christian beliefs. I may not respond to all arguments in every thread but you guys don't always do that either. There are many things I have said that go unresponded to.

So your faith decrees that your supposed to use non-existant logic to things that aren't even related to religious issues and flat-out ignore when an opponent has evidence you can't crack?


Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
HA! I am far from the most dramatic person here. Just look at some of these other posts.

Yes, you're totally right. It's not like I've spent over 3 years of my life trying in vain to reason with her, with countless hours trying to find out drums of evidence to counter all her claims only to have her use all the cheap tricks I've written about in this thread. I'm just biased and intolerant of her sane, well-rounded views, the air-tight reasoning she uses and the absolute neutrality she uses in judging all events we discuss on this forum. I guess I'm just crazy.

[QUENTIN]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat

I won't leave this forum as long as we can find ONE conservative (John doesn't count because he doesn't post that often) that we can have a serious, mature debate with.....one that doesn't end up with someone posting pictures of black people getting lynched.

In all fairness, that was totally called for. We were discussing life pre-1960s and lynching was a major part of the debate. Lynn said that until now, with fake violence on televisions shows like CSI, the only people that saw violence or its aftermath in America were cops and that it made them sick in the head. So the fact that we often had circus-like grisly mob executions in this country, and there is photographic evidence of such, was both pertinent to the subject at hand and necessary I think to show Lynn just how wrong she was and that the spectacle of violence has been a part of American history since our founding. It's not as though Lynn said she supports Bush on his tax cut and I said "You're intolerant! And to prove it: pictures of dead black people".

As for conservatives... Most people have a problem with the way Lynn debates more than her viewpoints. If she could defend her beliefs well, it would be a different story. We don't have many other conservatives on our board, but that's just because Canadian movie message boards aren't something that attract your average conservative. The few that are here though I think are appreciated and respected enough and if more were to come it wouldn't be a problem. You can't paint people being unwillling or unable to debate Lynn anymore as people being unable or unwilling to debate with all conservatives.

And yes, this thread has now ventured into very melodramatic territory and is completely off-topic. Valiant effort to get it back on track though Bubba.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by QUENTIN
And yes, this thread has now ventured into very melodramatic territory and is completely off-topic. Valiant effort to get it back on track though Bubba.

You're very right, but if Lynn is being honest and we don't hear from her, then there's nothing to discuss. She was the only one who thought that Angelina was in the wrong in doing this. I don't think we'll get much follow-up involving the topic, as nobody else seems to care.

I just wanna say that now that I think about it, it definetely shouldn't have come to this, but it's just want happened I guess.

[The Postmaster General]

Everyone remember to breathe.

[The Heart Collector]

I didn't know Madsen was posting here now.

*bookmarks this forum, eagerly shows up here daily*

[Vong]

Originally posted by EVILxxx
Vong are you going for the Golden Schmoe for most eye rolls?

Dude.....is that an actual award? :eek:
If so, do nominate me!
In real life, I'm known as the Olympic Eye-roller....most consecutive number of complete eye-rolls in one minute.


:rolleyes:

[bigred760]

Not to get completely off the subject, but when did A Mighty Heart become about freedom of the press? I thought it was about Daniel Pearl's kidnapping and murder, and then how his pregnant wife dealt with it all. There might be a little bit about freedom of the press, but I don't think it's the main plot point of the movie.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by bigred760
Not to get completely off the subject, but when did A Mighty Heart become about freedom of the press? I thought it was about Daniel Pearl's kidnapping and murder, and then how his pregnant wife dealt with it all. There might be a little bit about freedom of the press, but I don't think it's the main plot point of the movie.


From what I understand, the best analogy is this: A Mighty Heart is to the Iraq War as Missing is to the U.S. backed takeover of Chile.

[MadsenOMC]

Brando, I'm not sure if you were directing anything at me. I am perfectly capable of debating conservatives. My wife is one, as is her entire family. Some of my family members are as well. For years I've been teased for being "the family liberal." I don't have a problem with that. My problem is with people like Lynn. Others here have done a good job of stating their issues with her. She is so incredibly biased and hypocritical. She only sees one side of every issue. Everything is black and white. All left is evil and all right is good. It is incredibly difficult to have a reasonable debate with someone like her. I don't think a serious and mature debate is possible. I'm sorry if you feel that she has been unfairly picked on, but I disagree. I don't think that is the case.