Posted on 08/09/2002 6:58:34 AM PDT by Lazamataz
He's one of Hollywood's hottest actors and, with Natural Born Killers among his starring roles, is no stranger to controversy.
But now Woody Harrelson has taken another brave step - he's passionately defended George Michael over his anti-Bush and Blair single Shoot The Dog.
The 41-year-old star - currently appearing in On An Average Day opposite Kyle MacLachlan at the Comedy Theatre in London - has hit out at the backlash against the song's lyrics which criticise George Bush, Tony Blair and the war on terror since September 11.
At his play's after-show party on Wednesday night, Woody told Jessica: "I saw the Daily Mirror's front page on George Michael and I thought it was brilliant. I've always been a fan but he's right up there now. I think he's a great guy.
"I haven't seen the video for his song but I was fascinated by what he had to say.
"He's incredibly brave to have done that song. Especially when doing something like that could be considered very dangerous in today's world."
Harrelson - who is famous for his role as the dim barman Woody in Cheers and who stunned audiences with his powerful portrayal of a murderer in Natural Born Killers - is the first American to stand up and defend the 39-year-old British singer.
The former Wham! star caused outrage by using the Daily Mirror's Howdy Poodle front page, which poked fun at the special relationship between Britain and the US, on the single's cover.
"I can't believe he got so criticised in America for it. It's so unfair," said Woody. "I hear he's too scared to go over to the States now. What a joke. I'd really like to meet George.
"I want to congratulate him on standing up and speaking out.
"I totally support him and wish him all the best. It would really make my day if you could set up a meeting with me and George. I just want to shake that guy by the hand."
He also had nothing but praise for the Daily Mirror.
"I have one thing to say about the Mirror - it's amazing," he said. "The paper's stance on the war against terrorism is just right. It's so bold.
"The war against terrorism is terrorism. The whole thing is just bullsh*t. What you guys have done is very brave."
Woody - who was with his wife Laura and their two daughters Deni, nine, and five-year-old Zoe at the party at Adam Street private members' club - has been living in London for two months. He has homes in Hawaii and Costa Rica and proclaims to be a vegan, although he was gobbling up the canapes at the party.
"I love it over here, man," he grinned, sipping a pint of beer.
"I've been really busy but now the play has started I want to have a little fun. There's a little spot I go to but I'd rather not tell you where it is."
London cab driver Les Dartnell also attended the play.
In June Woody was wrestled to the ground by policemen and arrested after he went berserk in the back of Les's taxi. The cabbie said the star acted like a "caged animal".
Within minutes of Les picking the actor up from Chinawhite at 2am, Woody had trashed the cab. He then booted the door open and made a run for it.
Les dropped the charges after Woody paid him £542.96 and the two men shook hands after the play. "He said, 'No hard feelings'," said Woody. "He seemed like a nice guy. It's just one of those terrible circumstances."
Those think-tanks, policy makers, politicians and citizens who abandoned the Monroe Doctrine and embrace[d] a role of intervention and threat of military force to sculpt world politics to conform with US interests. This lead America down the path of imperialism and global policing you see today.
If you think this is hyperbole, consider that as of now we assume the right to 'inflict democracy' where we choose. While it is a valid fact that the spread of democracy is a honorable goal, it has morphed into a divine right of the western world, ie "we should do it whenever the price is 'low enough'".
So, we have moved from an 'encouragement' stance to a 'threat' stance... EXCEPT where pressures to implement democracy conflict with our other interests, such as middle east oil and even with Afghanistan where we were reluctant to upset/disempower the Taliban (even though Al Queda was protected by them) due to ongoing negotiations to secure a pipeline in the region.
Thus, you can see the duplicity in our foreign policy -- we invoke the righteousness of 'freedom and democracy' when it suits us, and ignore it when it suits our 'oil interests' (Wall Street).
The 'Islamic Street' has to be viewed as a misdirection of legitimate discontent, the people are not permitted to hold thier dictators (who are traitors to them via the US) to account, so the formalized, politically correct enemy becomes the US.
Only the insane 'hate freedom' but the situation at hand, and the situation Islam is now evolving out of, is one that foments social insanity. It is a transition, a cultural revival that is actually moving *closer* to modern thought but is hitting a political wall of tyranny and confusion that US oil policy and US imperial tendencies support.
It is real easy to point to an individual or 'terrorist group' and condemn them and point out insanity and falsely held beliefs, but thier existance is a symptom of policy held BOTH by thier rulers and the US. Viewed on the whole, world politics can be seen as a type of intelligent mechanism, by 'intelligence' I mean a system that shows behaviorism and is just as vulnerable to 'insanity' as any human being given an environment that confounds reason.
It is irresponsible of us to ignore the meta-factors that are manifesting the symptoms of world terrorism and instead seek to suppress this by sheer force while holding our economic interests supreme over human values.
Far too easy to point to terrorist and lay all the blame at thier feet and then turn around and use them as justification for even further policies of imperial force.
The words 'subversive' and 'imperial' are vulnerable to accusations of hyperbole, one must learn to apply them to the extent they are true, also to dare to don that perspective in order to explore the true extent of the reality.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Sam Huntington, Henry A. Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, American Enterprise Institute, RAND Corporation.
I have not yet brought forth the religious factors propelling this -- everyone talks about Islam, few talk about the alignments of Christianity and Judaism with the war faction.
To engage in religious war, to validate it, is to literally set fire to civilization. A fire near impossible to extinguish.
What good is it to 'achieve justice' for 911 if it entails such risks for the world?
Everyone wants the world 'made safe' -- the problem is that some of these people are utopians and believe that complete force and absolute domination of will can achieve this. It is a 'zero tolerance' policy that will set the world ablaze where it fails and impart totaltarianism where it succeeds.
Look at it this way- if America is attacked again with even one quarter of the effectiveness of 911, what harms will that cause to freedom in a trickle-down police/security policy? Would you really want to live here?
The 'kill/imprison all people who hate America' policy is insane as an offensive strategy. It is beating on a hornets nest. It tricks us into using our power against ourselves. I advocate general disengagement and airtight defense while maintaining covert strikes based on impending neccessity and vigorous pursuit of policy changes that address the DISEASE causing terrorism.
Through this we secure the high moral ground neccessary for world support. A redemption of our past recklessness and duplicity. Its not 'just' the US, its the western world who has a 'plank in thier eye'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.