View Full Version : ddemis, scumbag mark cuban!
I just saw on fox news that mark cuban is financing a movie called" Redacted". The movie is going to great lengths to make our soldiers and marines look like plundering invaders who are terrorising civilans and killing innocent people. The director is Brian Depalma (scarface) who will stop at nothing to make this movie and slander the U.S. Does anyone know any thing more about this disgusting film and what can be done to stop it!
Failure2Stop
11-15-07, 14:30
It's freedom of speech and press man. If you don't want to see it, don't. If they want to call me a plundering invader, fine. But no one connected to the movie will ever earn a cent from me. From director to actor, studio to special effects.
That is, if this is true. Sometimes things get blown way out of proportion by someone that is easily offended or is working off of assumptions and conjecture. Remember the post about the bill that was going to take away vet's gun rights? It happens, this is the errornet afterall.
EDIT- My bad, this is a piece of shit movie. My money will never come anywhere close to anyone that assisted in its creation.
ddemis sorry man but your to late. Its already in post production and been released. But if you explore the link I provided it has only been released outside the U.S. (except for the NY film festival). Also a vast majority of the releases are in Europe. Brian Depalma is piece of shit for making this movie. That turd should be deported and exiled from this country along with Michael Moore. I don't want that asshole to breathe my air!! This type of shit makes my blood boil.
Here is the Linky http://imdb.com/title/tt0937237/
KintlaLake
11-15-07, 15:08
Reportedly, "Redacted" is an ugly film that tells a horryfying story.
DePalma has a long-standing, anti-war political agenda and the First Amendment rights to exercise it. Likewise Cuban, who has both the money to underwrite it and the medium (HDNet) to make it available in the U.S.
The film premiered at the Venice International Film Festival in August and appeared free on HDNet's "Ultra Video On Demand" yesterday. It's slated to open "in select theaters" tomorrow.
Anyone with an interest in "stopping" the film should get in front of it where it is instead of chasing it where it was months ago. There's a website (http://www.boycottredacted.com/home) that's trying to inspire a boycott.
This film will be unstoppable outside the U.S., especially in Europe.
If they want to call me a plundering invader, fine. .
It's not going to help the situation. This will only fire up the jihadis and further their support by the indigs. The First Amendment doesn't include yelling fire when there is no fire and it doesn't include intentially putting forth propaganda that will only infuriate our enemies even more and foster support for their cause. We can ignore this as a "freedom of speech" issue to our own peril.
How is it this movie is just now making it on the complaint list here? As i am new to this form I have little to say so far. However I have been cursing this movie since i heard of 4 months ago.
If you support the 2nd Ammendment, you need to support the 1st as well.
If you don't agree with the movie, you don't need to spend the money to see it.
Plenty of other things to get worked up over.
While I totally agree with Templar, I can still dislike the movie and those involved.
What's wrong with plundering?
If you support the 2nd Ammendment, you need to support the 1st as well.
You really see this as a First Amendment issue? If it is, then subversion is covered under that Amendment and there should be no law concerning subversive, inciteful, or traitorous speech.
You really see this as a First Amendment issue? If it is, then subversion is covered under that Amendment and there should be no law concerning subversive or traitorous speech.
I don't like the premise of the movie, and I'm not going to see it, but I support their right to make it.
I don't see it as sedition. A protest, yes.
I'm sure that there were far worse "libels" printed up about British troops concerning their occupation of Boston, NY, etc. in 1775/76.
Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean that you should be able to ban it.
There is a Big difference between freedom of speech and slander! This shit head is a traitor in my book and should be dealt with in the appropriate manner! Portaying U.S. Military as a bunch of murdous thugs! I love it when the liberals who have never even set foot in the sandbox come out and say that morale is low and that the majority of Iraqi's hate us. I will admit I myself have never set foot over there either but have many close friends (I know everyone has a friend who did this or that or says this or that) who have fought and sacrificed for the people of Iraq and flat out say do not believe any thing you get from the media about Iraq.
KintlaLake
11-15-07, 16:03
Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean that you should be able to ban it.
Yup.
I won't be seeing the film, either, not in a theater and not on HDNet. But it seems to me that anyone who rapes and murders a 14-year-old should feel more of our anger than the filmmaker who tells the story.
This film won't light any fires under radical Islamists that aren't already burning. Fill your hand.
Failure2Stop
11-15-07, 16:26
Since someone made this goat-turd we have to accept that it is now part of the world. What would be worse-
1- Piece of shit movie released. Veterans and patriots hate it and the people that made. Movie makes $752.34 in the US. The islamo-fascists still hate us. Europe continues on it's path to Frenchification. US Forces continue to kick the **** out of any insurgent stupid enough to crawl out of its dark hole.
2- Some miraculous uprising occurs and the US government siezes and destroys all known copies of the film. Worldwide, conspiracy theorist douche-bags flood the world with wailings about how the Americans cannot let anyone see how terrible the war actually is, that we obviously really are murderous rapists unleashed on a poor, peaceful people. Everybody hates us even more, and the copies that do get out are viewed as "truth", inciting more anger and making us a bunch of hypocrits.
What damage came from televising the beating of Rodney King and the result of the officers' trial? Was that right or wrong to do? It doesn't matter.
The people we are fighting would hate you no matter what. The only way to end their jihad is proper distribution of high explosives and allocation of high-speed bits of metal.
KintlaLake
11-15-07, 16:50
You really see this as a First Amendment issue? If it is, then subversion is covered under that Amendment and there should be no law concerning subversive, inciteful, or traitorous speech.
I have the Constitutional right to criticize my fellow citizens publicly -- whether that citizen is my next-door neighbor or the President of the United States.
It's what separates us from Burma or Pakistan, to name two governments that gratuitously play the "sedition" and "subversion" cards to oppress their citizens.
I have no interest in seeing this movie, but their right to produce and film it is what makes America America. The premise sounds like it is based on a rape/murder that actually ocurred. While I believe the average fighting man is the salt of the earth, there are horrendous exceptions to this rule. The military profession is like any other, with a full spectrum of quality.
My uncle served in Vietnam and hated the movie Platoon when it came out. So did my history teacher. the idea was that bad things happened, but the movie packed every atrocity into two hours to make it look like murder, rape and burning villages was just another avergae day at the races.
One thing I will guarantee you - this movie, barring it totally sucking as a piece of cinema (Depalma is capable of really good and reall y bad movies), will probably sell like hotcakes to dishrag Europeans and lefty New Yorkers - it shovels and edifies what they already believe - that military men are slightly stupid, easily fooled, heartless killing machines OR broken, whacked out shells who were used as tools and now are appropriately guilt ridden. the actual truth has no place in the equation. That disgusts me much more than some pantywaist movie.
Nevermind. I don't think it will be taken well.
I support the 1st, regardless of how vile some speech is.
Veterans and patriots hate it and the people that made. Movie makes $752.34 in the US. The islamo-fascists still hate us. Europe continues on it's path to Frenchification. US Forces continue to kick the **** out of any insurgent stupid enough to crawl out of its dark hole.
+1 I definately agree with this
Business_Casual
11-15-07, 20:07
I'm more curious why all of your topics start out with "ddemis." Just wondering, dude.
M_P
What's wrong with plundering?
The movie portrays it as a bad thing. :D
Seriously, the best way to stop movies like this from being made is to not see them. The Free Market at work.
Joseywales
11-15-07, 20:22
ddemis sorry man but your to late. Its already in post production and been released. But if you explore the link I provided it has only been released outside the U.S. (except for the NY film festival). Also a vast majority of the releases are in Europe. Brian Depalma is piece of shit for making this movie. That turd should be deported and exiled from this country along with Michael Moore. I don't want that asshole to breathe my air!! This type of shit makes my blood boil.
Here is the Linky http://imdb.com/title/tt0937237/
Well, if you ever see the guy, make sure you live a big Boston Steamer on the hood of his car.
Freedom of speech.
You may not agree with it, but then again Hillary Clinton does not agree with you (or me), and she's got more money. By the grace of God though, our Consitution (for now) protects us from her as it does that movie and the right to make it from us. Gotta take the good w/the bad sometimes even though it sucks.
I just wont be seeing it. Depalma isnt that great of a director anyways.
I read every reply and fully understand the first amendment and free speech but at a time of war any film, literature, speech or action by any individuals that is Treason or detrimental our country should not be permitted. We live in a very disturbing time when American reporters from CNN hang out with insurgents in Iraq and place shootings of our guys on the evening news and call it a " first amendment " right to show the public.Can you imagine a reporter from ww11 hanging out with nazi snipers and telling how they just picked off one of our guys! It would have been unheard of! There has to be some limit to this madness!
I've read all the replies, also. I am left wondering why the WWII generation is considered the "Greatest Generation" since they raped and pillaged (according to the arguments I see here) our precious Constitution during their conflict. Seems to me they should be considered anything but "Great".
And I'm curious, when does free speech cross over to inciteful, traitorous, or seditious? Or does it ever?
KintlaLake
11-16-07, 11:30
So, then, how 'bout we enact a law that reads something like this:
Whoever, when the United States is at war,...shall willfully utter, print, write or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States, or the flag of the United States, or the uniform of the Army or Navy of the United States into contempt, scorn, contumely, or disrepute, or shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any language intended to incite, provoke, or encourage resistance to the United States, or to promote the cause of its enemies, or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy...and whoever shall willfully advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated, and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished...
Like that?
It was called The Sedition Act (1918), amending the 1917 Espionage Act.
Fortunately, Congress repealed it three years later.
I'm more curious why all of your topics start out with "ddemis."
Interesting question.
Fortunately, Congress repealed it three years later.
Too bad they weren't as conscientious about the other Amendments.
BTW, what sorry excuse did the "Greatest Generation" come up with to inter the Americans of Japenese decent during WWII?
Interesting question.
"Damn Demis(Democrats)" is my best guess, but it is totally without any kind of support other than my imagination.
Too bad they weren't as conscientious about the other Amendments.
BTW, what sorry excuse did the "Greatest Generation" come up with to inter the Americans of Japenese decent during WWII?
Edited, because I need more sleep :(
The constitution is just another piece of paper caught in the middle of a struggle that has gone on since democracies first existed: Power and the balance thereof being shifted to the ruling class (governtment office) and crushing the country as a whole.
Good reply, WS6, but I think you may have meant it for the 2nd Amendment thread. We were discussing the First Amendment in this one. :) However, that last part I quoted could and does apply to both.
Good reply, WS6, but I think you may have meant it for the 2nd Amendment thread. We were discussing the First Amendment in this one. :) However, that last part I quoted could and does apply to both.
This is what happens when www.m4carbine.net is open in 2 windows.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.