Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tim Robbins Speech

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tim Robbins Speech

    Just thought I'd share this, which I thought was particularly well expressed.

    http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0416-01.htm

    'A Chill Wind is Blowing in This Nation...'
    Transcript of the speech given by actor Tim Robbins to the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on April 15, 2003.

    TIM ROBBINS: Thank you. And thanks for the invitation. I had originally been asked here to talk about the war and our current political situation, but I have instead chosen to hijack this opportunity and talk about baseball and show business. (Laughter.) Just kidding. Sort of.

    I can't tell you how moved I have been at the overwhelming support I have received from newspapers throughout the country in these past few days. I hold no illusions that all of these journalists agree with me on my views against the war. While the journalists' outrage at the cancellation of our appearance in Cooperstown is not about my views, it is about my right to express these views. I am extremely grateful that there are those of you out there still with a fierce belief in constitutionally guaranteed rights. We need you, the press, now more than ever. This is a crucial moment for all of us.

    For all of the ugliness and tragedy of 9-11, there was a brief period afterward where I held a great hope, in the midst of the tears and shocked faces of New Yorkers, in the midst of the lethal air we breathed as we worked at Ground Zero, in the midst of my children's terror at being so close to this crime against humanity, in the midst of all this, I held on to a glimmer of hope in the naive assumption that something good could come out of it.

    I imagined our leaders seizing upon this moment of unity in America, this moment when no one wanted to talk about Democrat versus Republican, white versus black, or any of the other ridiculous divisions that dominate our public discourse. I imagined our leaders going on television telling the citizens that although we all want to be at Ground Zero, we can't, but there is work that is needed to be done all over America. Our help is needed at community centers to tutor children, to teach them to read. Our work is needed at old-age homes to visit the lonely and infirmed; in gutted neighborhoods to rebuild housing and clean up parks, and convert abandoned lots to baseball fields. I imagined leadership that would take this incredible energy, this generosity of spirit and create a new unity in America born out of the chaos and tragedy of 9/11, a new unity that would send a message to terrorists everywhere: If you attack us, we will become stronger, cleaner, better educated, and more unified. You will strengthen our commitment to justice and democracy by your inhumane attacks on us. Like a Phoenix out of the fire, we will be reborn.

    And then came the speech: You are either with us or against us. And the bombing began. And the old paradigm was restored as our leader encouraged us to show our patriotism by shopping and by volunteering to join groups that would turn in their neighbor for any suspicious behavior.

    In the 19 months since 9-11, we have seen our democracy compromised by fear and hatred. Basic inalienable rights, due process, the sanctity of the home have been quickly compromised in a climate of fear. A unified American public has grown bitterly divided, and a world population that had profound sympathy and support for us has grown contemptuous and distrustful, viewing us as we once viewed the Soviet Union, as a rogue state.

    This past weekend, Susan and I and the three kids went to Florida for a family reunion of sorts. Amidst the alcohol and the dancing, sugar-rushing children, there was, of course, talk of the war. And the most frightening thing about the weekend was the amount of times we were thanked for speaking out against the war because that individual speaking thought it unsafe to do so in their own community, in their own life. Keep talking, they said; I haven't been able to open my mouth.

    A relative tells me that a history teacher tells his 11-year-old son, my nephew, that Susan Sarandon is endangering the troops by her opposition to the war. Another teacher in a different school asks our niece if we are coming to the school play. They're not welcome here, said the molder of young minds.

    Another relative tells me of a school board decision to cancel a civics event that was proposing to have a moment of silence for those who have died in the war because the students were including dead Iraqi civilians in their silent prayer.

    A teacher in another nephew's school is fired for wearing a T- shirt with a peace sign on it. And a friend of the family tells of listening to the radio down South as the talk radio host calls for the murder of a prominent anti-war activist. Death threats have appeared on other prominent anti-war activists' doorsteps for their views. Relatives of ours have received threatening e-mails and phone calls. And my 13-year-old boy, who has done nothing to anybody, has recently been embarrassed and humiliated by a sadistic creep who writes -- or, rather, scratches his column with his fingernails in dirt.

    Susan and I have been listed as traitors, as supporters of Saddam, and various other epithets by the Aussie gossip rags masquerading as newspapers, and by their fair and balanced electronic media cousins, 19th Century Fox. (Laughter.) Apologies to Gore Vidal. (Applause.)

    Two weeks ago, the United Way canceled Susan's appearance at a conference on women's leadership. And both of us last week were told that both we and the First Amendment were not welcome at the Baseball Hall of Fame.

    A famous middle-aged rock-and-roller called me last week to thank me for speaking out against the war, only to go on to tell me that he could not speak himself because he fears repercussions from Clear Channel. "They promote our concert appearances," he said. "They own most of the stations that play our music. I can't come out against this war."

    And here in Washington, Helen Thomas finds herself banished to the back of the room and uncalled on after asking Ari Fleischer whether our showing prisoners of war at Guantanamo Bay on television violated the Geneva Convention.

    A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.

    Every day, the air waves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and fear.

    I am sick of hearing about Hollywood being against this war. Hollywood's heavy hitters, the real power brokers and cover-of-the- magazine stars, have been largely silent on this issue. But Hollywood, the concept, has always been a popular target.

    I remember when the Columbine High School shootings happened. President Clinton criticized Hollywood for contributing to this terrible tragedy -- this, as we were dropping bombs over Kosovo. Could the violent actions of our leaders contribute somewhat to the violent fantasies of our teenagers? Or is it all just Hollywood and rock and roll?

    I remember reading at the time that one of the shooters had tried to enlist to fight the real war a week before he acted out his war in real life at Columbine. I talked about this in the press at the time. And curiously, no one accused me of being unpatriotic for criticizing Clinton. In fact, the same radio patriots that call us traitors today engaged in daily personal attacks on their president during the war in Kosovo.

    Today, prominent politicians who have decried violence in movies -- the "Blame Hollywooders," if you will -- recently voted to give our current president the power to unleash real violence in our current war. They want us to stop the fictional violence but are okay with the real kind.

    And these same people that tolerate the real violence of war don't want to see the result of it on the nightly news. Unlike the rest of the world, our news coverage of this war remains sanitized, without a glimpse of the blood and gore inflicted upon our soldiers or the women and children in Iraq. Violence as a concept, an abstraction -- it's very strange.

    As we applaud the hard-edged realism of the opening battle scene of "Saving Private Ryan," we cringe at the thought of seeing the same on the nightly news. We are told it would be pornographic. We want no part of reality in real life. We demand that war be painstakingly realized on the screen, but that war remain imagined and conceptualized in real life.

    And in the midst of all this madness, where is the political opposition? Where have all the Democrats gone? Long time passing, long time ago. (Applause.) With apologies to Robert Byrd, I have to say it is pretty embarrassing to live in a country where a five-foot- one comedian has more guts than most politicians. (Applause.) We need leaders, not pragmatists that cower before the spin zones of former entertainment journalists. We need leaders who can understand the Constitution, congressman who don't in a moment of fear abdicate their most important power, the right to declare war to the executive branch. And, please, can we please stop the congressional sing-a- longs? (Laughter.)

    In this time when a citizenry applauds the liberation of a country as it lives in fear of its own freedom, when an administration official releases an attack ad questioning the patriotism of a legless Vietnam veteran running for Congress, when people all over the country fear reprisal if they use their right to free speech, it is time to get angry. It is time to get fierce. And it doesn't take much to shift the tide. My 11-year-old nephew, mentioned earlier, a shy kid who never talks in class, stood up to his history teacher who was questioning Susan's patriotism. "That's my aunt you're talking about. Stop it." And the stunned teacher backtracks and began stammering compliments in embarrassment.

    Sportswriters across the country reacted with such overwhelming fury at the Hall of Fame that the president of the Hall admitted he made a mistake and Major League Baseball disavowed any connection to the actions of the Hall's president. A bully can be stopped, and so can a mob. It takes one person with the courage and a resolute voice.

    The journalists in this country can battle back at those who would rewrite our Constitution in Patriot Act II, or "Patriot, The Sequel," as we would call it in Hollywood. We are counting on you to star in that movie. Journalists can insist that they not be used as publicists by this administration. (Applause.) The next White House correspondent to be called on by Ari Fleischer should defer their question to the back of the room, to the banished journalist du jour. (Applause.) And any instance of intimidation to free speech should be battled against. Any acquiescence or intimidation at this point will only lead to more intimidation. You have, whether you like it or not, an awesome responsibility and an awesome power: the fate of discourse, the health of this republic is in your hands, whether you write on the left or the right. This is your time, and the destiny you have chosen.

    We lay the continuance of our democracy on your desks, and count on your pens to be mightier. Millions are watching and waiting in mute frustration and hope - hoping for someone to defend the spirit and letter of our Constitution, and to defy the intimidation that is visited upon us daily in the name of national security and warped notions of patriotism.

    Our ability to disagree, and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are. To allow those rights to be taken away out of fear, to punish people for their beliefs, to limit access in the news media to differing opinions is to acknowledge our democracy's defeat. These are challenging times. There is a wave of hate that seeks to divide us -- right and left, pro-war and anti-war. In the name of my 11-year-old nephew, and all the other unreported victims of this hostile and unproductive environment of fear, let us try to find our common ground as a nation. Let us celebrate this grand and glorious experiment that has survived for 227 years. To do so we must honor and fight vigilantly for the things that unite us -- like freedom, the First Amendment and, yes, baseball. (Applause.)
    "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

    – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

  • #2
    I read this the other day. Very well put.
    I have no problem at all with being proved wrong. Especially when being proved wrong leaves the world a better place, than being proved right...

    Comment


    • #3
      I'll try to remember this the next time the race card is thrown out to silence debate.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Tex
        I'll try to remember this the next time the race card is thrown out to silence debate.
        Shrug. It's not just be the race card. Careers have already been destroyed over anti-war positions. I would think Americans would not tolerate that, but hey with Patriot Act I/II and the seemingly compliance with which it's being pushed through I guess I was wrong.

        As they say, give an inch and they take a mile. I think that's why the founding fathers of the USA were so heavy on principle.
        "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

        – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

        Comment


        • #5
          My point is that nearly everybody tries to vilify the opposition in their political rhetoric, Tim Robbins hardly being an innnocent by-stander. Calling businessmen greedy is no different than calling anti-war protestors unpatriotic in my book.

          Comment


          • #6
            " As the Rocky Mountain News put it in Thursday's edition, "If George W. Bush had lobbied for the cancellation of Robbins' appearance, the actor might have a point. But the First Amendment merely guarantees that the government won't stifle your speech; it does not require private citizens to praise and honor you if you spout unpopular views. Indeed, it's their First Amendment right to revile you — even if you're a Hollywood star who assumes that praise and honor are his birthright.""

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Radbabe
              " As the Rocky Mountain News put it in Thursday's edition, "If George W. Bush had lobbied for the cancellation of Robbins' appearance, the actor might have a point. But the First Amendment merely guarantees that the government won't stifle your speech; it does not require private citizens to praise and honor you if you spout unpopular views. Indeed, it's their First Amendment right to revile you — even if you're a Hollywood star who assumes that praise and honor are his birthright.""
              Popular/unpopular is one thing. Losing your job/career is another.
              "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

              – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MikeJ


                Popular/unpopular is one thing. Losing your job/career is another.
                Having Freedom to speak out against or for does not mean you are exempt from any consequences wrought by your stand by the First Amendment. It makes no mention of exemption from the consequences. The only exemption noted was preventing the government from punishing you, not the rest of citizenry.

                Time and time again, many pro-war activists are being riducaled by the anti-war activists as murderers, warmongers, greedy businessmen, and other name-callings. Even pro-war activists do occasionally lose their jobs or careers.

                It's not whether is it fair or not, but this kind of thing do happen no matter how hard you try to avoid this in any event of war.

                What bothers me the most is that many anti-war activists use ANY forum to attack the pro-war stance even if it's not appropriate to do so. Which is why many people are turned off by several Hollywood actors spurring out anti-war propaganda, it's not anti-war stance, it's where and how they speak out. Speaking out at Oscar nomination cermony is inappropriate no matter how you cut it out to be.

                Going to Baghdad is certainly inappropriate, because in effect, you are claiming to be the former regime's propaganda machine (like Sean Penn). The anti-war (as well pro-war) activists need to find the appropriate times, forums and stay there.

                Dan
                Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

                "Aim small, miss small."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MikeJ


                  Popular/unpopular is one thing. Losing your job/career is another.
                  If these actors were government employees that would be one thing.However, the celebrities that choose to speak out publicly are able to do so simply because of the power and prestige their careers afford them.Careers, mind you, that are based on popularity with the public.If the celebrities choose to politicize their careers, they shouldn't whine when the American public responds in kind.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hey I just learned that Tim Robbins was in Top Gun, perhaps one of the biggest pro-war movies of all time. I wonder if he has trouble sleeping at night.
                    "There is no great genius without some touch of madness."

                    Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Radbabe


                      If these actors were government employees that would be one thing.However, the celebrities that choose to speak out publicly are able to do so simply because of the power and prestige their careers afford them.Careers, mind you, that are based on popularity with the public.If the celebrities choose to politicize their careers, they shouldn't whine when the American public responds in kind.
                      We're not just talking celebrities here.

                      But supposing we were: is a celebrity not allowed to voice his/her opinion?

                      If you're Micheal Moore and you use basically hijack the Oscars as a venue to let your views out - hey by all means rip the guy to shreds... but these guys can't even say a word without risking absurd amounts of backlash from the American public. When asked directly about, I've seen many say they would not comment about it, period. This is great, considering sports/movies/tv shows have all of nothing to do with politics.

                      The US is definately treading on the slippery slope, but hey I'm just an outsider. If that's all good and fine for Americans so be it.
                      "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

                      – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MikeJ

                        The US is definately treading on the slippery slope, but hey I'm just an outsider. If that's all good and fine for Americans so be it.
                        I don't think it really matters. Most of hollywood is out of step with mainstream america but they still make huge amounts of money.
                        "There is no great genius without some touch of madness."

                        Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Chuck


                          I don't think it really matters. Most of hollywood is out of step with mainstream america but they still make huge amounts of money.
                          It's funny how that many of these actors are willing to play in war movies (Sean Penn in 'Thin Red Line' or 'Taps')....but still rip apart the pro-war activists....what a bunch of hypocritical people!

                          Dan
                          Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

                          "Aim small, miss small."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tex
                            My point is that nearly everybody tries to vilify the opposition in their political rhetoric, Tim Robbins hardly being an innnocent by-stander. Calling businessmen greedy is no different than calling anti-war protestors unpatriotic in my book.
                            I think as a businessman, you're not effective at your job of making money for the company that hired you unless you are greedy.
                            Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by tigersqn


                              I think as a businessman, you're not effective at your job of making money for the company that hired you unless you are greedy.
                              I couldn't disagree more, but perhaps we have different definitions of greed.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X