OLIVER STONE - STONE ACCUSES HOLLYWOOD OF PROMOTING WAR

Stone needs to go and sniff on some more blow.

[JediMatrix has made statements that he/she wants to attribute to the entire population, without providing proof of scientific study. Without proof, his statements are merely subjective opinion, and cannot be broadened to include the entire population. IOW, we can only speak for ourselves. Any increased influence we may feel is limited to specific local “communities” that are part of our extended identity.] "Most people don't know much about the science of manipulating beliefs and the dialectics used to foster conflicting views [that] are used to narrow a debate and lead things in a certain direction." [Is it your general belief that "most people" (save yourself of course) are stupid, or merely ignorant? Since your argument hinges on an intelligent/educated population, what is your plan to get “the folks” to that place, given that our largest single property tax expenditure is (and has been) dedicated to education?] "In the long run it is intended by the top echelons of the elite for the U.S.A. to be dismantled in favor of a global governing structure that supersedes national and local sovereignty." [You spend a great deal of time reading conspiracy theory, but you don't seem to balance that reading with actual history, sociology, and economics. Your notion is an ancient one, and is not based in fact, but in extremism, rumor, and scare tactics. (And, exactly what are the “top echelons” of the “elite.”)] "Both so-called Liberals and Conservatives typically support policies that foster the same ultimate outcome." [What outcome is that? And, how can the same people you believe are “intellectually lacking” all support the same outcome? Would that be the massively "ignorant" outcome? OR, are “the people” interested in their own best interests and are merely supporting different ways to attain that goal?] "American imperial practices will lead to so much anti-American global hostility that the citizens of foreign nations will have little remorse about going to war and killing Americans (it's not solely [M]uslims who are becoming hostile toward America - and America's intervention around the world and attempts to push our social customs and governing system are keys - people don't hate our freedom, they just don't want us to subvert their society or support puppet tyrants in their countries." [WRONG – WRONG – WRONG! The ONLY people who don’t want us to “subvert” their society are the murderous tyrants who use human beings as PRODUCT (much worse than mere “pawns”) to line their own pockets, or fulfill their own sickening desires to “own” and possess other humans, against their will.] This is yet another ancient argument; another version of the "ugly American" rubric that supposedly precludes ALL American foreign policy but that consistently fails in the face of reality. And, it goes back to the time BEFORE the Declaration of Independence. In fact, the United States of America DOES NOT HAVE ANY "IMPERIAL" PRACTICES. The United States of America DOES NOT colonize, and NEVER HAS! Have you no idea that we have first-hand knowledge and experience of the ugliness, and danger, and outright “sin” that accompanies the notion of taking-over other countries and why we DO NOT “take over” other countries and possess them in order to make them into our own image.] "Liberals, meanwhile, often support dissolution of nationality in favor of some UN type system that enforces the social rights and values they believe in." [The end justifies the means. The end justifies the means. The end justifies the means. The Left never runs out of worn clichés such as “the end justifies the means” because their superior notion of “social rights” and the so-called “ values” that they believe are superior to any collateral issues that they believe accompanies the “patriotic” notions of folks who support their country OVER the “socially superior rights” and “superior values” that the Left believes in.] "So either we accept international totalitarianism the international socialist/"liberal" way by voluntary legal consent, or we head into WW3 (the national socialist aka Nazi/fascist way), so that citizens of the world become so terrorized and desperate they'll accept any proposed solution that yields peace." [Have you no concept of the notion that there are situations and conditions that are worse than war? Have you no concept of good versus evil? Have you no concept of the notion of doing what needs to be done because it is the right thing to do?] "Neo-cons and radical [M]uslims are mostly just pawns being used to generate the latter scenario since the more peaceful way isn't likely to be accepted." [WHAT PEACEFUL WAY? TO PEACEFULLY ACCEPT WORLD DOMINATION BY TOTALITARIAN DICTATORS?? Do you honestly believe that a worthwhile goal is to “give up” and be lead peacefully to “peace” by any means possible?? That is insane. The notion that it is “better” to peacefully accept self-imprisonment, than to die attempting to live free is absolutely insane. The notion that it “better” to peacefully accept the oppression of a totalitarian dictatorship, than to die attempting to live free is absolutely insane.] "I don't support either ideology, as I have a more true [truer] libertarian view and think that governments should cease to be necessary as people learn to voluntarily cooperate for mutal well-being and common goals." [So, as your "true" libertarianism transmogrified into "true" arrogance you now jump to the position that folks who don't have the common sense to come in out of the rain are somehow going to "learn" to "voluntarily" cooperate for "mutual well-being and common goals?" (And what is the point of using the word "voluntarily," before cooperate. Are you allowing that "involuntarily" cooperation is also an option?)] "Governments tend to attract money and power hungry people and become both inefficient and parasitic, giving tyrants a monopoly on force." [Just exactly where did you matriculate? They must have had some slam dunk polysci classes, all taught by long-haired, sixties-radical, puffing, dreaming, profs, who never learned to teach, but rather to program students with personally written, modified, and printed dictionaries, history books, psychology manuals, and sociology nut-files, with false economic realities, and their own selections of easily spun factual references. In fact, I doubt that you even have a good working understanding of the term "government” given your statement.] Please, broaden your reading sources. Eventually you will come around. The adage that a liberal is just a conservative who has yet to be mugged, is based more in reality than wishful thinking.