The explosion, which would have the force of a nuclear bomb, constitutes the moral high point of the movie, the moment of climactic cleansing, as the Pure One clad in white merges with the great white mass of the huge terminal wall, at which point the screen goes pure white. And reverently silent.
Absurd. Fabulous job missing the point entirely and then dressing it up as you wish. That is, as an anti-american, pro-terrorism screed. As if it's that simple. The audince is supposed to like that character so that they are devastated when they see what he becomes. We're meant to follow the path of a good-natured man who is changed into something else. Certainly, we're meant also to understand how certain actions and policies of our government provide fodder for the radicals to convert people like this kid. But I think we're supposed to see that, regardless of what actions precipitated it, the truly pernicious element is that terrorists are created, not born. To stop and consider that perhaps some of America's activities could be aiding in that creation isn't anti-american. It's called *thinking*. Ideologues like Krauthammer would prefer to believe in a black and white world of good vs. evil where you're always either one or the other and born that way, because it simplifies morality. If there's any one thing that a liberal does believe in it's that morality (among other things) is not necessarily simple in every case. That we're willing to self analyze in the pursuit of truth isn't treasonous. It's what allows people, and nations, to locate and correct their own faults. I categorically refuse to accept this propostion, that my willingness to admit fault is equivalent to moral ambiguity, which is, in this America, tantamount to self-loathing, america-loathing. It's a ridiculous and simple minded cast, put forth by fools who can't tolerate even the notion of complexity. "We need labels and boxes!" their minds scream. "Us" "Them" "For" "Against" "Good" "Evil" "Right" Wrong" "Left" "Right". That's all bullshit. The average man seeks out simple answers as a way to cope with an overwhelming world (see, for example, Religion). The Right plays on this dishonest viewpoint, to the detriment of our way of life, to the deaths of our soldiers and to the utter dissolution of what our country once stood for. For shame.
yes
plus as a Brit i would point out that some non-Americans are not necessarily being anti-American if they disagree with certain things that certain Americans do (even if those Americans happen to be the executive). Over here it is a standard practice of certain people dismiss it that way and i know the same is true in the States. It is a way of dismissing an argument and not dealing with the points raised.
sometimes the truth is simple; 2+2=4, and sometimes it is not; how should i behave as a moral being in a world of starvation and disease, should i quit my job and go and work with the poor when if everybody did that the global economy would collapse; how much of my own income is it moral for me to keep when I earn less than $20,000 a year or if I am Bill Gates? if love is good why do some say that love between two people of the same gender is wrong? why did slavery happen? why did the Holocaust? "We need labels and boxes!" their minds scream. "Us" "Them" "For" "Against" "Good" "Evil" "Right" Wrong" "Left" "Right".
we live in an analog world
it is not 1 or 0 but rather how many real numbers are there between 1 and 0? answer infinite see Georg Cantor
sometimes morality is analog Oscars for Osama |
