Put Up or Shut Up

By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com

Tuesday, Aug 29, 2006

The TV Emmy Awards were broadcast a few days ago and it was the usual:

a bunch of smug, self-satisfied show biz types cloyingly parading their liberal

views in front of an adoring Los Angeles audience. I mean, come on, you

show biz people are supposed to be creative—how about something new and

exciting: Maybe demonstrating to the country you might have a clue about

what's going on in the world.

I am an independent who believes good policy can be found on both the left

and the right. For example, Al Gore has the right idea about global warming,

and President Bush is correctly defining Islamic fascism. It annoys me

greatly that some Americans are so fanatical about ideology that they have

lost the ability to think. Many of those Hollywood types mugging to the

camera the other night are in that category. Largely dressed in borrowed

clothes and spouting borrowed ideas, these people constantly vilify

conservatives as complete idiots. How irresponsibly condescending.

So let's be straight here. My money says Tina Fey doesn't know anything

about the roots of terrorism or how to prevent the next terror attack. The

woman can sneer all day long, but I'll put her on my TV program in a

heartbeat if she wants to prove me wrong.

Neil Young can write all the mediocre music he wants about how evil the

Bush administration is, but while he is rockin' in the free world, I know it

wouldn't be free if Young were in charge.

My pal Jon Stewart and his legion of writers think they're ultra cool and hip

because they embrace every left wing cause that comes down the pike.

Yeah, you won an Emmy, Stewart, but the fix was in. The choir to whom

you preach dominates the award voting. You Daily Show guys can be funny

but how many Americans want you people standing between them and Iran?

Maybe Larry David, but that's it.

One of the few positives in the Emmy program was host Conan O'Brien, who

was funny in a good-natured way. Although he didn't say so, I believe

O'Brien understands the absurdity of these entertainers displaying their

knee-jerk left-wing politics in an entertainment venue. Even if you're a

liberal, you've got to see how obnoxious this is.

So I say this, Bill Maher. You're a witty guy, but out of your league on

complicated matters like national security. When you can tell me what Ansar

al-Islam was doing in Northern Iraq, then I might watch your HBO show.

When George Clooney can explain exactly how the Pakistani secret police

broke a captured al-Qaeda big shot who subsequently gave up the London

terrorists arrested for planning an attack on American airliners, then I'll rent

"Syriana."

When the pouty Dixie Chicks, who are having big trouble selling concert

tickets this summer, can tell me the origin of the Islamic Brotherhood, then

I might go to one of their shows.

But I'm not holding my breath on any of these challenges. As the saying

goes: Opinions are like lips, everybody has them. But some opinions, like

some lips, are razor thin, and there ain't enough collagen in the world to

help these misguided showbiz people.

 

 

War does make enemies mad

Ted Wilson is right. War does make our enemies mad. Imagine that! I guess the Japanese were pretty mad when they employed Kamikaze pilots during World War II. Maybe we should have told them we were sorry and brought our boys home. Certainly, by fighting on we were "adding to the enemy's enthusiasm for terrorism and recruiting suicidal bombers" as Wilson so eloquently stated. Let's just apologize and leave Iraq. That will put a halt to that nasty terrorism stuff.

Frank Trinnaman

Alpine

 

 

The Iraq Solution
By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, Aug 24, 2006
War is a performance business. That is, if you get in it - you better win it. Stalemates are not acceptable, especially in America where we worship victory and do not suffer defeat easily. Despite what revisionist historians say, the USA did not lose militarily in Vietnam, we simply did not defeat the communist enemy. And shortly after we withdrew, they violated the signed treaty and took over South Vietnam. Today, we are facing a similar situation in Iraq. The latest Opinion Research poll says 61% of Americans now oppose the Iraq war, just 35% support the action. But this is misleading. The opposition is not against the campaign to bring democracy to Iraq, the dissent is about our performance there. In other words, if the coalition was winning in Iraq, the folks would be behind the effort. The far left is trying to make this a moral issue, it is spinning that somehow America is bad for deposing a murderous dictator and making free elections possible. If that's bad, then George Washington is Satan. That's how dopey the moral objection to Iraq is. But the folks are correct when they say that unlimited sacrifice in Iraq is not good for the nation. So far, the USA has spent hundreds of billions and lost thousands of good people to death and grievous injury in that chaotic place. If victory is not assured, then we need to change direction. There is no question that Iran, the world's most dangerous country, is behind much of the instability in Iraq. If the USA follows John Murtha's advice and pulls out quickly, Iran will partner up with the killer Shiite cleric al-Sadr and dominate Iraq. That will heighten Iran's power in the Gulf region and give Hezbollah and other terrorist outfits including al-Qaeda far more opportunities to develop their homicidal plots. So cutting and running is irresponsible and dangerous to America, and anyone who promotes that strategy should be aggressively challenged. But the Bush administration does owe a new battle plan to the fallen American soldiers. If the sectarian violence cannot be brought under control by, say, the end of this year, then a partitioning of Iraq should occur. Already, the Kurds in the north have a state that pretty much does what it wants without Baghdad's approval. Similar states could be established in the Shia south and the Sunni triangle with Baghdad becoming an open city. There would be a centralized government in the capital but all three states would largely be autonomous, sharing oil revenue based upon population. Iran would influence the Shia, no question, but it would not be able to dominate the entire country if the U-S kept a strong presence to make sure coups did not take place. This might be the best solution to a bad situation. President Bush should realize his current Iraqi policy is not acceptable to most of the folks. If Mr. Bush continues to stay the course based simply upon hope, his party and his legacy will suffer dramatically. So, once again, no good deed goes unpunished. The United States and Britain held a mass murderer, Saddam Hussein, accountable for his misdeeds and his repeated violations of the Gulf War ceasefire. They removed him and gave millions of Iraqis a chance at freedom. That was noble. But the action has gone unappreciated because the world is not a noble place. Time to recognize that and impose a new, workable solution.
##
Would you like to read more of Bill's newspaper columns? Premium Members of BillOReilly.com have access to Bill's Article Archive that contains dozens of his best articles.

 

Re: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

You've delivered again! My admiration grows, Nephew.

Uncle Nevin

>From: "Tijs Limburg" 
>Subject: Re: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest
>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:45:57 -0600
>
>Garth,
>
>They also forgot one thing, that is that most household phones these days
>use power due to their portability as wireless handsets. I haven't seen a
>phone that doesn't use power in years. And as you pointed out, cell phones
>can be charged in a car if needed. Try charging a handset in a car! As
>well, my cell phone batteries last for days. I think on average I charge
>my
>phone 3.5 times per week. I don't think power outages are even an issue.
>If your power is our more than a few hours, it is usually due to something
>severe enough to knock down power poles, which means landline telephony
>won't work either because those lines are down also.
>
>Remember how they tell everyone not to make calls during an earthquake in
>order to keep the lines that do work open for emergency crews? Well, cell
>phones relieve that problem. And the towers themselves are extremely
>resilient Let's remember that when September 11th happened, people were
>able to use cell phones without many problems. I remember cell phone usage
>during that time was at record volumes as relatives from all over were
>calling the cell phone numbers of loved ones in NY to see if they were
>affected. Try that with a copper land line. (Oh, and did I mention that
>the long distance call for all of those who used a cell phone was free?)

_________________________________________________________________
Get the new Windows Live Messenger!
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline

Understanding Iran & Lebanon

Understanding Iran & Lebanon

By Bill O’Reilly

"President Bush firmly believes the terror war is playing out in Iraq and that if Iran gets influence there, which it would should America leave, terrorism becomes dramatically stronger. Millions of Americans do not support the President on Iraq, but overall the President is correct about worldwide terrorism. It's not going away, even if we do get out of Iraq. Last week the UN talked tough about separating Hezbollah and Israel. This week France, which led the cease fire movement, shocked many by offering just 400 troops. Once again France epitomizes the world and its failure to confront the murdering terrorists. As the prime terror facilitator, Iran must be having a blast. It well understands that France and most of Europe is weak and scared, and that China and Russia see any weakening of the US as more important than fighting terror. The hateful Iranian leadership will defy the UN on nukes because it knows the UN is also weak and afraid. Back here we're a divided country - far left ideologues oppose most anti-terror methods. But there is a divide between the far left and the regular folks. I believe many Americans understand the terror danger, but are tired of bad news from Iraq. But being tired is no excuse - we all have an obligation to pay attention to this war and to vote for people not along party lines, but for those who have a clue as to how to win this terror war."

Response to Letter

See the response to the Letter referred to in "Update on Hollywood Post" by Gloria C. Hunt, Constituent Services Coordinatorof the Office of the Governor for the state of utah.

This is the first response in what will likely become many.

Click the Title for a quick shortcut

Re: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

Garth,

 

They also forgot one thing, that is that most household phones these days use power due to their portability as wireless handsets.  I haven't seen a phone that doesn't use power in years.  And as you pointed out, cell phones can be charged in a car if needed.  Try charging a handset in a car!  As well, my cell phone batteries last for days.  I think on average I charge my phone 3.5 times per week.  I don't think power outages are even an issue.  If your power is our more than a few hours, it is usually due to something severe enough to knock down power poles, which means landline telephony won't work either because those lines are down also. 

 

Remember how they tell everyone not to make calls during an earthquake in order to keep the lines that do work open for emergency crews? Well, cell phones relieve that problem.  And the towers themselves are extremely resilient  Let's remember that when September 11th happened, people were able to use cell phones without many problems.  I remember cell phone usage during that time was at record volumes as relatives from all over were calling the cell phone numbers of loved ones in NY to see if they were affected.  Try that with a copper land line.  (Oh, and did I mention that the long distance call for all of those who used a cell phone was free?)

 

RE: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

Garth,

It appears you have a good case for another letter to the editor to the
Trib. go for it!

Nev

>From: "Limburg, Garth" <
>Subject: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest
>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:25:54 -0600
>
>An article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune today (8-21-2006) trying to
>scare the hell out of anyone who doesn't have a landline telephone or is
>contemplating dropping the one they have. It appears that someone over
>at Qwest got to the Tribune and convinced them that the issue has merit
>enough for an article. The bottom line of the article is that everyone
>needs to maintain a landline telephone for emergency and safety reasons.
>If this is such a concern of Qwest why the $25.00 a month charge for a
>copper wire coming into your home or apartment? As part of that $25.00
>a month charge why does Qwest continue to collect (they give you no
>choice) access charges to their network and extended area calling
>charges to places you never call? They can't give you a good reason why
>a residential line costing $11.00 a month suddenly balloons to $25.00.
>Must be the charges that still pay for the Spanish-American War of 1898
>(which Congress has ordered removed by-the-way). Qwest tries to explain
>the necessity of a landline telephone this way:
>
>
>
>The landline is necessary because the battery in a cell phone can't be
>charged during a power outage while a landline telephone will continue
>to work even with the power out.
>
>
>
>Emergency calls to 911 can't be traced back to an exact location using a
>cell phone while landline telephones give 911 operators exact locations
>of the emergency.
>
>
>
>First, doesn't Qwest know that cell phone batteries can be charged in an
>automobile? Da! Besides that, most homes and apartments have more than
>one cell phone user today. What is the chance that all the cell phones
>in one place have batteries that need to be charged during a power
>outage?
>
>
>
>Second, hasn't Qwest heard of enhanced 911? Unbelievable! After the
>guy in Provo died in his apartment about two years ago because he didn't
>have a landline telephone and called 911 on his cell phone and the 911
>operator screwed up by not getting the right address from the guy so he
>died! The family sued Provo City and the City as well as every other
>911 call center in the State has moved over to enhanced 911 service that
>now automatically picks up the location from the cell phone call. Of
>course there was no mention of this in the Tribune article.
>
>
>
>It is amazing how stupid Qwest is and how desperate they are to maintain
>their landlines by scaring people. I am extremely disappointed that the
>Tribune would fall for this garbage and actually print it. -Garth-
>

_________________________________________________________________
Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

Qwest is Full of it!

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Limburg 
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:52 PM
To: Limburg, Garth
Subject: Re: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

What a joke. Why are they trying to keep people in the dark and
behind the technology age? They and other telecommunications companies
like AT&T are trying to make us think we need more than we really do.
How many phones does one person need? Isn't the goal of technology
today to make things smaller, more simple, easier to use, and more
affordable. Unfortunately those blinded by the corporate world where
more is better (in their case more money and more stuff for the
consumer) they will see themselves clouded and cluttered with the
past. Of course for a company like this to make money they must use
every effort to be the Harold Hill travelling salesman Instead of
these companies investing in the future where they could profit even
more from the capabilities of fiber opticts, voice over ip services,
and the new age of cell phones, they fight against these technologies
like it's an ugly step child. There future however is determined. They
are courageous captains that are going down with the sinking ship.

RE: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

I have not had a land line for over 3 years.  The only down side that I have found is that I drop a call once in a while. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Limburg, Garth 
Cc: Tijs Limburg; Eric Limburg; Nevin Limburg; 
Subject: What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

An article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune today (8-21-2006) trying to scare the hell out of anyone who doesn’t have a landline telephone or is contemplating dropping the one they have.  It appears that someone over at Qwest got to the Tribune and convinced them that the issue has merit enough for an article.  The bottom line of the article is that everyone needs to maintain a landline telephone for emergency and safety reasons.  If this is such a concern of Qwest why the $25.00 a month charge for a copper wire coming into your home or apartment?  As part of that $25.00 a month charge why does Qwest continue to collect (they give you no choice) access charges to their network and extended area calling charges to places you never call?  They can’t give you a good reason why a residential line costing $11.00 a month suddenly balloons to $25.00.  Must be the charges that still pay for the Spanish-American War of 1898 (which Congress has ordered removed by-the-way).  Qwest tries to explain the necessity of a landline telephone this way:

 

The landline is necessary because the battery in a cell phone can’t be charged during a power outage while a landline telephone will continue to work even with the power out.

 

Emergency calls to 911 can’t be traced back to an exact location using a cell phone while landline telephones give 911 operators exact locations of the emergency.

 

First, doesn’t Qwest know that cell phone batteries can be charged in an automobile?  Da!  Besides that, most homes and apartments have more than one cell phone user today.  What is the chance that all the cell phones in one place have batteries that need to be charged during a power outage?

 

Second, hasn’t Qwest heard of enhanced 911?  Unbelievable!  After the guy in Provo died in his apartment about two years ago because he didn’t have a landline telephone and called 911 on his cell phone and the 911 operator screwed up by not getting the right address from the guy so he died!  The family sued Provo City and the City as well as every other 911 call center in the State has moved over to enhanced 911 service that now automatically picks up the location from the cell phone call.  Of course there was no mention of this in the Tribune article.

 

It is amazing how stupid Qwest is and how desperate they are to maintain their landlines by scaring people.  I am extremely disappointed that the Tribune would fall for this garbage and actually print it.  –Garth-

What A Propaganda Article Brought To You By Qwest

An article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune today (8-21-2006) trying to scare the hell out of anyone who doesn’t have a landline telephone or is contemplating dropping the one they have.  It appears that someone over at Qwest got to the Tribune and convinced them that the issue has merit enough for an article.  The bottom line of the article is that everyone needs to maintain a landline telephone for emergency and safety reasons.  If this is such a concern of Qwest why the $25.00 a month charge for a copper wire coming into your home or apartment?  As part of that $25.00 a month charge why does Qwest continue to collect (they give you no choice) access charges to their network and extended area calling charges to places you never call?  They can’t give you a good reason why a residential line costing $11.00 a month suddenly balloons to $25.00.  Must be the charges that still pay for the Spanish-American War of 1898 (which Congress has ordered removed by-the-way).  Qwest tries to explain the necessity of a landline telephone this way:

 

The landline is necessary because the battery in a cell phone can’t be charged during a power outage while a landline telephone will continue to work even with the power out.

 

Emergency calls to 911 can’t be traced back to an exact location using a cell phone while landline telephones give 911 operators exact locations of the emergency.

 

First, doesn’t Qwest know that cell phone batteries can be charged in an automobile?  Da!  Besides that, most homes and apartments have more than one cell phone user today.  What is the chance that all the cell phones in one place have batteries that need to be charged during a power outage?

 

Second, hasn’t Qwest heard of enhanced 911?  Unbelievable!  After the guy in Provo died in his apartment about two years ago because he didn’t have a landline telephone and called 911 on his cell phone and the 911 operator screwed up by not getting the right address from the guy so he died!  The family sued Provo City and the City as well as every other 911 call center in the State has moved over to enhanced 911 service that now automatically picks up the location from the cell phone call.  Of course there was no mention of this in the Tribune article.

 

It is amazing how stupid Qwest is and how desperate they are to maintain their landlines by scaring people.  I am extremely disappointed that the Tribune would fall for this garbage and actually print it.  –Garth-

Update On Hollywood Post

I have added a "comment" on the response to the "Hollywood" post entitled "I Agree, Nevin". It is a letter that I have now sent sent to politicians and political pundits on the 20th of August. The letter includes references you may want to look up dealing with current debates by ICANN, the Internet governance board, and descisions they are making that could affect you and I. I have researched their debate, and thus have come up with the conclusions and opinions stated in the posted follow-up comment. Your support for our view on this type of legislation and action is going to be neccessary to get these types of motions passed by government officials. Please visit www.house.gov and www.senate.gov to write your Congressmen and notify them of your support of our viewpoiont. Lets get a petition started!

Please also feel free to use the letter to send to your Congressmen!

You can take a shortcut to "I Agree, Nevin" by clicking the title of this article.

Profile in Sanity

Profile in Sanity

By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com

Thursday, Aug 17, 2006

We are living in treacherous times and terrorists well understand that; even

when one of their murderous plots is uncovered, the fallout from the

aborted action is a big win for them. After British authorities prevented a

couple dozen Muslim fanatics from blowing up a number of American

jetliners, the ensuing airport chaos caused pain and inconvenience for

thousands of people. Unfortunately, that will continue for the foreseeable

future.

Osama and his pals must take great joy at watching 80-year old

grandmothers being patted down and their creams confiscated by jumpy

security people. This is the ultimate al Qaeda reality program: "Survivor:

Airport."

Add to that the foolish political bickering over who is protecting Americans

better, and you have great joy in Mudhutville; the hiding Qaeda leadership

wins again.

Of course, the sane way to protect Americans in the sky is to stop looking

for nail files and begin profiling people who might actually cause terror

damage. That is not "racial" profiling; that is "terror" profiling. Most of the

recent terror activities have been perpetuated by young Muslim men. So it is

these people that need greater scrutiny when they check in for a flight.

I know that's mean, but believe me when I tell you that if the Irish

Republican Army was attempting to blow up American planes, I'd have no

problem being patted down before I stepped on a plane. I would understand

and appreciate the common sense behind the close look. I would not

consider myself a victim, but would be furious that my ethnic cousins were

causing so much trouble.

I believe some Muslim-Americans feel the way I do. They understand that

some of their co-religionists are remorseless killers.

But not all Muslims think that way, and certainly the ACLU and other far-left

groups oppose profiling. They fight hard against most strategies designed to

make terror attacks more difficult. Except, of course, when it involves them.

You may remember the New York Civil Liberties Union sued when the NYPD

instituted random bag searches on the subway. Yet a sign at the NYCLU

building warned that the organization had the right to search the bags of all

people entering there. Hypocritical? You make the call.

The biggest problem we have in America when it comes to defeating

terrorism is that some of us live in the real world, and some of us live in a

theoretical zone where all problems could be solved if only we just talked

things over with those who want to kill us. For those people, actions like

profiling, unilateral military campaigns, and tough interrogation methods are

simply too drastic. These Americans believe aggressive terror

countermeasures actually encourage violence against us and create more

willing terror killers.

Looking back, the actions of Presidents Clinton and Bush in his first year

pretty much ignored the growing terror threat from the Muslim world. Little

aggressive action was taken against al Qaeda when it blew up our

Embassies in Africa and attacked our warship off the coast of Yemen.

There was no airline profiling going on when 19 Muslim killers boarded three

airliners on 9/11, all with one way tickets to hell. Had we been wiser then,

three thousand Americans could be alive today.

But we were not wise then, and we are not wise now, either. Call it what

you will, but lay off Granny at the airport and zero in on higher risk subjects.

 

I Agree, Nevin

Nevin,

 

This is something I have never understood about Hollywood.  Even the staunch and unfogiving RIAA has allowed for edited versions of CDs to be sold without the explicit lyrics of the original versions.  And I don't think the art of music has suffered much from this.  But, if I remember correctly and corect me if I'm wrong because I was very young when that all occured, but it seems to me that the change was brought on by the government.  And that wasn't the only thing of the sorts that the government pushed through.  Remember TV ratings?  Remember the video game ratings legislation?  So it seems to me we need to push this the same way all of the previously mentioned changes were made and get the government on our side. And while were at it, lets get them to act on laws for the internet similar to city "red light districting" to put all of the smut where it belongs: off of .com (which stands for commercial) domains and onto domains that deal with their particular type of "business."  This would be similar to how cities are allowed to restrict certain type of businesses to specific parts of the city.  And if people say that this somehow violates any bill of rights, lets consider the fact that "time, place, and manner" restrictions are part of government power.

 

As well, let also remember that when you go to a library, you wouldn't expect to find a book entitled "The History of America" in the 500 section, because that is the Sciences section.  You would find that book in the 900's.  So why sould we expect anything from the interet? Afterall, isn't it just a massive collection (collection (of books) in latin "librarium, or in greek "bibloteca") and therefore, a massive library of information?   So lets get it categorizd further.  Just as in a library, as it stands on the interent you would not expect to see a university at www.university.com, rather, it would be www.university.edu . This is the same with government, non-profits, etc.

 

And lastly, while I am speaking on the subjects of libraries and the like, there is something that most collections of any type of information have.  And that is an index.  So, what is the problem with allowing DVD players to be programed via an index to skip certain parts of the movie, wether it be profanity or video content?  Each DVD has an embedded time stamp for each frame, and thus DVD players could easily be programmed for example to skip over the frames with time stamps between 1:23:33 and 1:33;55, as ane xample.  So what I'm saying is that Hollywood wouldn't even have to cut their movies up!  All they would have to do is release an index pertaining to the movie and where mature content might be.  Simple.  And they could make extra money doing it!  As well as could the manufacturers of electronic equipment.  This would become the "V-chip" of this decade. 

 

But, it will take government action as far as I can tell.

 

Movies Made in Hollywood

-----Original Message-----
From: Nevin Limburg
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:57 PM
To: drob@desnews.com
Subject: Your Tuesday Deseret News column, August 15

Doug:

I applaud your column, "Hollywood Snubs 44% of Public," which I have
copied
to follow this email. You hit right on the mark with my thinking of many

years. Hollywood could so easily, with just minor changes, make most of
its
product suitable for a great majority of Americans. I detest the
definition
of "creative artistic expression" that certain people and groups have
concocted that now governs what is produced and rated for our viewing.
Just
as the Supreme Court has ruled that communities and states can have
their
own "standards" by definition to rule what is allowed and where it can
be,
or not, in a community, with zoning applications, communities should be
able
to have edited movies available that adhere to standards the community
desires. Wouldn't that be reasonable?

U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch ruled with what he has in case law or

whatever, instead of challenging such law in favor of the wanting
public.
We need more judges who will stand up for what is right and decent in
this
age of moral depravity. If it is a violation of federal copyright law
to
edit movies, then challenge the law to have it amended! People already
do
their own version of editing sometimes, as you pointed out, by
fastforwarding or scene selection, so why can't that be the right of a
company in adhering to community standards to at least make the product
available to those who want it? How is that "irreparable damage" to the

"artist" or producer? They still get their money, so why should they
care
if a certain group of people, likely 44% of the public as you factually
indicate, get the product they really want, instead of what "non-caring"

Hollywood believes we all must joyfully receive?

I appreciate your "standing tall" column on this topic, and hope that
many
see it and that other journalists follow your lead. Please send the
column
to Hollywood, newspapers, journalists, judges, and even President Bush,
and
you can add my voice to it. And if you wish to make this a letter to
the
editor, that would be fine with me. Long live Doug Robinson!

Nevin R Limburg
Pleasant View, UT

deseretnews.com
Utah
Tuesday, August 15, 2006

"Hollywood snubs 44% of public"
By Doug Robinson
Deseret Morning News
If you were a businessman and you knew that 44 percent of the
American
public would buy or rent a certain product if you made slight changes to
it,
you would probably give it to them.
What business doesn't give the public what it wants? What business

doesn't live by the creed that the customer is always right?
Hollywood, it turns out. Responding to a suit filed by
moviemakers, a
federal judge ruled recently that it is a violation of the federal
copyright
law to edit movies for obscene content.
Joanne Moulton, who at one time owned a half-dozen Play It Clean
stores around Utah until lawsuits dried them up one by one, was given
five
days to pack up her last store.
"Everyone wins," says Moulton of the edited movie business.
"Hollywood
makes millions on this industry and the public gets what it wants. I
feel
like I've been on a mission. This was about viewers' rights. And viewers

lost."
Thus ends a contentious, bitter three-year battle with Hollywood
that
raised a number of sticky issues about rights for artists and art
owners.
U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch ruled that edited objectionable
scenes
cause "irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression in the
copyrighted movies."
Putting the phrase of "creative artistic expression" to most
Hollywood
fare is like calling Big Macs "cuisine." For every "Crash" and
"Traffic,"
there are dozens of movies like "Con Air," "Friday the 13th," "Anger
Management" and anything with Sharon Stone and Vin Diesel in it. Try
calling
those "art."
Anyone with eyes can see that Hollywood's use of swear words,
nudity
and gore goes beyond "artistic expression." Or don't you find it funny
that
"artistic expression" consists of precisely one F-word, which, not
coincidentally, is the exact dosage allowed to earn a PG-13 rating.
An ABC News poll in 2005 showed 44 percent of Americans favored
editing; 39 percent said that, given the choice, they'd "likely" rent
edited
movies, and 20 percent - which represents more than 40 million people -
said
they'd "very likely" rent such movies.
Hollywood is telling its customers to take what it gives them or
take
a hike. In essence, the ruling means that even if you own a work of
"art" -
movies, paintings, etc. - you cannot alter it. You must view a movie as
the
"artist" intended it to be watched, which, taken one step further, means
you
can't legally fast-forward through F-words, sex, bloody murders,
whatever,
in your own living room. The "artist" also didn't intend for you to skip
the
trailers or the credits, and you can't jump ahead to watch a favorite
scene
in the middle of the movie because the movie was intended to be watched
from
beginning to end.
If Hollywood is turning its back on a chance to make more money;
if it
is making its own edited versions for TV and airlines but refuses to
make
them available to the general public, this can lead to only one
conclusion:
That this is more about ego, power and social agenda than art.
Not that Hollywood never has a legitimate gripe. I watched edited
and
unedited versions of the brilliant movie, "Crash." In one scene, the
Sandra
Bullock character makes stereotypical remarks about a Hispanic repairman
who
is working in her home. That scene is completely deleted, not for
language
or nudity but apparently because it is politically incorrect and racist.
Of course it is! That's the point. The movie is all about
misunderstandings and connections between races and trying to understand
one
another. Later, we learn that the Hispanic man is a loving father and
husband, but the contrast between perception and reality is lost.
On the other hand: So I'm watching the mindless movie "Failure to
Launch" with my family when the lead character tells a young woman to
get
the F-word out of his car.
Nice "artistic expression."
If nothing else, Hollywood should clean up its own act to save it
from
hacks. So far, it shows no interest in responding to many of its
customers.
Meanwhile, viewers feel like they have no choices now, but they're

wrong. They can choose not to patronize or rent certain movies, even if
it
means going without. Besides, doesn't it seem that our culture is
obsessed
with movies and that our chief forms of entertainment are pretty much
limited to movies and restaurants?
Maybe there is something better to do.

Doug Robinson's column runs on Tuesdays. Please e-mail drob@desnews.com.

Recent Doug Robinson columns

World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front Page

RSS feed for this page RSS feed for this page + Daily index

(c) 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

Movies Made in Hollywood

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Limburg, Garth <
Date: Aug 15, 2006 1:39 PM
Subject: Movies Made in Hollywood
To: Nevin Limburg <
Cc: Tijs Limburg <

Nice letter Nevin.  I agree 100%.  You and I agree almost all the time,
although I still think that you need to reevaluate your position of
allowing church aide to fall into the hands of Hezbollah (my assumption,
but very likely).  Tijs:  Please post this on our family blog and send
me the e-mail address so that I can send material directly to the blog.
Thanks, Garth

-----Original Message-----
From: Nevin Limburg 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:57 PM
To: drob@desnews.com
Subject: Your Tuesday Deseret News column, August 15

Doug:

I applaud your column, "Hollywood Snubs 44% of Public," which I have
copied
to follow this email. You hit right on the mark with my thinking of many

years.  Hollywood could so easily, with just minor changes, make most of
its
product suitable for a great majority of Americans.  I detest the
definition
of "creative artistic expression" that certain people and groups have
concocted that now governs what is produced and rated for our viewing.
Just
as the Supreme Court has ruled that communities and states can have
their
own "standards" by definition to rule what is allowed and where it can
be,
or not, in a community, with zoning applications, communities should be
able
to have edited movies available that adhere to standards the community
desires.  Wouldn't that be reasonable?

U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch ruled with what he has in case law or

whatever, instead of challenging such law in favor of the wanting
public.
We need more judges who will stand up for what is right and decent in
this
age of moral depravity.  If it is a violation of federal copyright law
to
edit movies, then challenge the law to have it amended!  People already
do
their own version of editing sometimes, as you pointed out, by
fastforwarding or scene selection, so why can't that be the right of a
company in adhering to community standards to at least make the product
available to those who want it?  How is that "irreparable damage" to the

"artist" or producer?  They still get their money, so why should they
care
if a certain group of people, likely 44% of the public as you factually
indicate, get the product they really want, instead of what "non-caring"

Hollywood believes we all must joyfully receive?

I appreciate your "standing tall" column on this topic, and hope that
many
see it and that other journalists follow your lead.  Please send the
column
to Hollywood, newspapers, journalists, judges, and even President Bush,
and
you can add my voice to it.  And if you wish to make this a letter to
the
editor, that would be fine with me.  Long live Doug Robinson!

Nevin R Limburg
Pleasant View, UT

deseretnews.com
Utah
Tuesday, August 15, 2006


"Hollywood snubs 44% of public"
By Doug Robinson
Deseret Morning News
     If you were a businessman and you knew that 44 percent of the
American
public would buy or rent a certain product if you made slight changes to
it,
you would probably give it to them.
     What business doesn't give the public what it wants? What business

doesn't live by the creed that the customer is always right?
     Hollywood, it turns out. Responding to a suit filed by
moviemakers, a
federal judge ruled recently that it is a violation of the federal
copyright
law to edit movies for obscene content.
     Joanne Moulton, who at one time owned a half-dozen Play It Clean
stores around Utah until lawsuits dried them up one by one, was given
five
days to pack up her last store.
     "Everyone wins," says Moulton of the edited movie business.
"Hollywood
makes millions on this industry and the public gets what it wants. I
feel
like I've been on a mission. This was about viewers' rights. And viewers

lost."
     Thus ends a contentious, bitter three-year battle with Hollywood
that
raised a number of sticky issues about rights for artists and art
owners.
U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch ruled that edited objectionable
scenes
cause "irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression in the
copyrighted movies."
     Putting the phrase of "creative artistic expression" to most
Hollywood
fare is like calling Big Macs "cuisine." For every "Crash" and
"Traffic,"
there are dozens of movies like "Con Air," "Friday the 13th," "Anger
Management" and anything with Sharon Stone and Vin Diesel in it. Try
calling
those "art."
     Anyone with eyes can see that Hollywood's use of swear words,
nudity
and gore goes beyond "artistic expression." Or don't you find it funny
that
"artistic expression" consists of precisely one F-word, which, not
coincidentally, is the exact dosage allowed to earn a PG-13 rating.
     An ABC News poll in 2005 showed 44 percent of Americans favored
editing; 39 percent said that, given the choice, they'd "likely" rent
edited
movies, and 20 percent - which represents more than 40 million people -
said
they'd "very likely" rent such movies.
     Hollywood is telling its customers to take what it gives them or
take
a hike. In essence, the ruling means that even if you own a work of
"art" -
movies, paintings, etc. - you cannot alter it. You must view a movie as
the
"artist" intended it to be watched, which, taken one step further, means
you
can't legally fast-forward through F-words, sex, bloody murders,
whatever,
in your own living room. The "artist" also didn't intend for you to skip
the
trailers or the credits, and you can't jump ahead to watch a favorite
scene
in the middle of the movie because the movie was intended to be watched
from
beginning to end.
     If Hollywood is turning its back on a chance to make more money;
if it
is making its own edited versions for TV and airlines but refuses to
make
them available to the general public, this can lead to only one
conclusion:
That this is more about ego, power and social agenda than art.
     Not that Hollywood never has a legitimate gripe. I watched edited
and
unedited versions of the brilliant movie, "Crash." In one scene, the
Sandra
Bullock character makes stereotypical remarks about a Hispanic repairman
who
is working in her home. That scene is completely deleted, not for
language
or nudity but apparently because it is politically incorrect and racist.
     Of course it is! That's the point. The movie is all about
misunderstandings and connections between races and trying to understand
one
another. Later, we learn that the Hispanic man is a loving father and
husband, but the contrast between perception and reality is lost.
     On the other hand: So I'm watching the mindless movie "Failure to
Launch" with my family when the lead character tells a young woman to
get
the F-word out of his car.
     Nice "artistic expression."
     If nothing else, Hollywood should clean up its own act to save it
from
hacks. So far, it shows no interest in responding to many of its
customers.
     Meanwhile, viewers feel like they have no choices now, but they're

wrong. They can choose not to patronize or rent certain movies, even if
it
means going without. Besides, doesn't it seem that our culture is
obsessed
with movies and that our chief forms of entertainment are pretty much
limited to movies and restaurants?
     Maybe there is something better to do.

Doug Robinson's column runs on Tuesdays. Please e-mail drob@desnews.com.


Recent Doug Robinson columns

World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front Page

RSS feed for this page RSS feed for this page + Daily index

(c) 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


--
Tijs Limburg
Chairman and CTO of DMX - Digital Media eXceleron, Inc.
Get eXcited!
www.dmxed.com

Analysis: Terrorism Abroad

Yesterday was another reminder of two very important things. 1: That terrorists do not care about human life, liberty, or justice. They do not believe that "all men are created equal", and they do not care if they even kill their own fellow Muslims.
2: It was also a reminder that WE THE PEOPLE are not alone in this fight against terror, and this is evidenced in the collaberation between many lands in hunting down this particular cell. What demogogs and leftists would like you to belive, that we are losing this war on all fronts and most especially in Iraq, is not true, and yesterday is evidence of that.

If our country's leaders were to still have a pre 9/11 mentality as a majority, we most likely would never have known terrorists were planning such an attack on human life, until we all watched the newscasts of planes falling from the sky, and FAA investigators trolling the Deep Atlantic for the wreckage.

Fortunately, we have people in office who understand the meaning of life, freedom, and liberty that they are willing to put their political careers to the test and on the line, and fight for truth and liberty. This is what kept us from having to write August 10th - 13th in our journals and memories as yet another destructive day for democracy. Unfotunately, even as we speak, those who have fought for these noble causes are being voted out. Senator Lieberman is one of the first. This means that this election year could be another very important and decicive election, that could turn the course of this country from Northward to Southward quite easily.

And if there is any doubt that this is a "Global War on Terror" or a World War, just read the following paragraphs from the MSN News report yesterday:

"British authorities said Thursday they thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up 10 aircraft heading to the U.S. using explosives smuggled in hand luggage, averting what police described as “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.

Officials told NBC News that the alleged mastermind of the plot is still in Pakistan and has yet to be captured...

Some plotters had already purchased tickets on a flight to stage a test run planned for this weekend...

the plot was on British officials’ radar for about two weeks and that several of the people involved had been monitored for several months...

At least one of the plotters attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan...

British investigators had the terror cell under close surveillance for several months, keeping the U.S. informed...

For the past several days, the FBI has feverishly looked for any potential ties to terrorists in the U.S., but has not found any.

“We literally in the last couple of weeks have had hundreds of FBI agents around the country tracking down every lead...,"FBI Director Robert Mueller told NBC...

News of the arrests and extreme security measures in London, a major international aviation hub, sent ripples throughout the world...

ABC News quoted sources as saying Western intelligence agencies had identified three of the alleged ringleaders. It said two were believed to have traveled recently to Pakistan and later had money wired to them from Pakistan...

French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said in Paris they “appear to be of Pakistani origin.”

Pakistan’s government said later its intelligence agents helped Britain crack the plot and had arrested two to three suspects...

Chertoff said the plot had the hallmarks of an operation planned by al-Qaida, the terrorist group behind the Sept. 11 attack on the United States.

“It was sophisticated, it had a lot of members and it was international in scope. "

(Emphasis was added) The full story by NBC can be seen here on
MSN.

The emboldened words show that this was a cross border operation to hone in on these cells, and to try to find any others. This is a global fight. And while leftists such as Al Gore continue to fight an actually disputeable war (scientists disagree entirely on Global Warming) on "...A Global problem..." [see AL GORE below], I think a much more important and lifesaving war is being fought by brave counterintelligence agents, millitary, politicians, and american citizens, as well as foriegn countries, to stop these attacks proactively. I think it is much more worth it to fight a proactive war, than to have to sift through rubble and debris like we did almost 5 years ago.

I never want to see that happen again, if it can at all be avoided.

- [Al Gore was quoted as saying "Global Warming is a Global problem, that must be stopped." (As Tim Allen would say) Gee, thanks Al, for that deep insight! I guess he and his cohort Bill (or as Patton would have called him, Willie) did not see the anihilation of thousands of lives over their span of 8 years in office as a threat OR a global problem. They were never quoted as saying such. And that's a memo.]

See also my words published by the McLeher News Hour 5 years ago.


As well as these words, which I sent to many Politicians in the aftermath of September 11th, 2001, and which still ring true today:

A Creed for Liberty; A Call to Defend

They attacked everything that is good, and glorious
about America. They attempted to Divide the very
threads of true freedom, justice, and peace. They
tore at the works of great men who were in the
callings of God to bring forth this nation. They
ripped at every life that died to make this nation
free, true martyrs in the sights of God. They call us
evil, when it is our nation that strives so willingly
to help the poor, needy, and hungry, not only within
our bounds, but in all other nations. They lashed at
those who sacrificed all to come and settle this
beautiful and promised land. They call us cowards,
when we have fought endlessly to end world conflict in
Wartime and Peacetime. Only in Building this nation
did we ever take offense against others. The
Mayflower, The Boston Tea Party, Our Founding Fathers,
every proud citizen that ever claimed to be an
American, every American who died in battle, or for
his beliefs, was mocked, all of our good deeds
forgotten, only our bad remembered by them. From
within our great nation of exploration, learning,
innovation, preservation, and beauty unmatched
anywhere on earth, they attempted to destroy us. It
is a sad chapter in the lives of those who are
American enough to stand by Her, defending peace,
defending liberty. I cry, and cry, to think what a
great thing they tried to take from this earth. I ask
why, why? No other nation in the history of the world
has done so much for mankind, whether providing safe
shelter, or walking on the moon, or bringing the
world closer together. What is so evil about these?
No, we are not always moral, friendly, or righteous
enough to be worthy of the blessings which God himself
bestows upon this nation and Her people, of this we
must do better. They celebrated, we mourned, we go
on. WE pick up the broken pieces, of body, building,
and morale, and move on, toward, closer toward that
day. When peace is ours, all over the world. For
peace is not only the absence of what is wrong, it is
also the presence of what is right.
Their attack criticized and forgot every great thing
this nation has accomplished. Whether by raising and
praising aspiring young children into great men and
women for mankind, or welding those great chains of
unity ever stronger to defeat the enemy. Many times
America has faced impossible foes, the British, the
Nazis to name a few. Now we fight a new war. Not
just to make war, and kill, as this has never been,
and will never be the purpose of America. But WE must
defend our Title of Liberty, Our Star Spangled Banner,
and we must fight to defend the rights of all men,
everywhere. WE strive as a nation to make all men
equal in creation. WE fight for peace, justice, hope,
virtue, love, charity, religion, liberty, and all men
on earth. Some will die, on both sides. But it is
better that one man die than an entire world dwindle
in unbelief, and hatred toward one another. May God
have mercy on the cowardly men who enacted this grief.
Our peacetime was joyus, enlightening, and wonderful.
But again it is time to pay the debt for our freedom.
To defend our freedom. To keep freedom alive. It
has been said, and is true, that freedom is not free.
WE THE PEOPLE must unite together in hope and love one
with another, to vanquish the foe, and set the world
at peace anew. WE have come together many times
before, WE have come together today to render
assistance to our fellow citizens, to sift through
rubble for remains of many American dreams, many in
pieces. Forever Raise our Title of Liberty. It can
be done, it Will be done. God forever bless America!

-Tijs G. Limburg

(c)2001 Tijs G. Limburg. All Rights Reserved. Please contact for a printed copy of "A Creed for Liberty; A Call to Defend".

Response to Deseret News Opinion

Previous Classics - Written before the creation of this weblog

The following is a response to an opinion published by the Deseret News on Monday, July 3, 2006:

I am sure the people of Lincoln, Nebraska are outraged regarding your editorial opinion published Monday, July 3, 2006. The people of Utah should be outraged, too. Again you opined that Utah’s indeterminate sentencing laws regarding sexual offenses against children are just fine and in fact represent some of the best in the nation. Tell that to the people of Nebraska. As you pointed out Utah has no mandatory minimum sentences for child sex offenders, instead the length of time spent in prison by convicted felons is left up to the prosecutors, judges, and Board of Pardons.

Defense attorneys and their clients are free to cut plea deals with prosecutors to get shorter sentences and the Board of Pardons can reduce time in prison based on “good behavior” and attending “therapy sessions”. Such was the case with Shane Copeland who was convicted in 1997 and 1998 in Utah of two felonies of child sex abuse and another for lewdness-sexual battery, a misdemeanor. He was released in Utah after a light sentence and now seven years later Copeland was arrested last week in Lincoln, Nebraska for raping three girls ages 11, 9, and 6.

The police chief in Lincoln said Copeland admitted to having sex with all three girls over an extended period of time. Instead of serving a long prison sentence in Utah as is mandatory now in eighteen states (including Nebraska) Copeland was put back out on the streets to scope out his next victims. In this case, three little girls in Nebraska are now new victims of a known abuser.

The Deseret Morning News needs to explain why you place the interest of the defense attorneys, judges, prosecutors, and members of the Board of Pardons above protecting innocent children from these evil acts. Who are you looking out for? Certainly not the children of Utah and other states who have no political power or voice in these matters.

Garth Limburg

Utah Highways Remain in the Dark

Utah has a real problem. It is a great place, and very beautiful. The people are great, and there are a lot of recreational and fun things to do. That's not the porblem. The problem lies with its DOT planners and engineers who just don't seem to understand economics or growth planning.

I cite a few developments. Number 1: The DOT (known as UDOT) recently forked out millions to restripe a carpool lane with two stripes in an effort to make it a limited access lane. (It used to be that you could exit or enter at your convenience. It was quite nice!) However, this new double stripe has been innefective in keeping people from crossing the lines. So, they are now going to pay 2 patrol officers to enforce the laws on the almost 60 mile continous stretch of carpool lane. Rather, UDOT should have saved their millions spent, and used it to improve the degrading I-80 stretch from the 215 Belt to the I-15 interchange. It was more needed.

They could have also used the funds to light up stretches of I-215 and I-80 that are dangerously dark. These 3 or 4 lane highways remain without adequate lighting (one section of I-215 is very dark as it is carved into a gulley that puts it below the natural ground level, making light a rare commodity on the highway.)

However, these concerns are minimal to my largest concern. The Salt Lake Valley is layed out with 4 main freeways. I-15 being the largest, I-215 is next, I-80 is a main trucking route, and the 201, which is used by commuters. However, these freeways have 1 thing in common. They all serve the area north of 60th south. The second thing is that the 15 and 215 are mostly north/south routes. The 80 and 201 are around 21st south and 30th south, and run east/west, but are for the most part 2-3 lanes in width. So, after about 60th south, there is no east/west freeway. WHY? Half of the valley's population lives in that vicinity, between 60th south and 140th south. And with houses and offices now spreading from 30th east to 70th west and beyond in that same region, why is there no east/west freeway somewhere between 90th south and 123rd south?

I have "enjoyed" watching the south end of the valley go through tremendous gridlock day after day, while musing at the fact that UDOT does nothing to remedy the issue. Not only that, but there is nothing of the sorts in their 30 year growth plan! This is absolutely absurd, and amazing! This section of the valley will probably see an increase of 250,000 or more peaople in the coming years. I "laugh" at the fact that it takes almost 45 minutes to travel from 20th east to 60th west, while the in the same time one can travel 40 miles to Provo from the same location.

Its time for UDOT to get out of the dark and see the light when it comes to planning a useable highway system, and not using discresionary funds to restripe an HOV lane that was fine the way it was, and spending millions doing it.

Its time to build an "I-280" like east/west belt before it is too late and the land is no longer available because the area is too crowded with population.

Welcome to In the Dark

Welcome to In the Dark, a weblog concerned with keeping you informed of rediculous government and corporate practices, as well as occasional op-ed pieces on education, science, technology, world events etc.