British Expatriate Network

Just a thought, we could hold a collection to pay for a Bris for Mel lol

If we dug deep enough, we might get enough money for a deeper cut than normal, lol

I thought this was a good piece of essay.

From the Telegraph.co.uk

"A Scottish actor who worked on Braveheart once told a director friend of mine what it was like working with Mel Gibson. "He's off his head," alleged the actor. "We'd all be standing there in kilts and with blue woad painted on our faces, ready to do a shot, when suddenly Mel would announce to the Alcoholics Anonymous members among us - a healthy number - that we had to have a meeting. So there we would be, behind the catering van with painted faces, reading from the Big Book and sharing our experience. You know, 'My name's Mel and I'm an alcoholic,' then we'd all go back to the set and get stuck into the English."

Recovering alcoholics like to say that they're sober one day at a time, and it can't be easy knowing that you're always just one drink away from your former self. Gibson went spectacularly off the rails last Friday and reportedly did what many alcoholics do - he allegedly drove his car at nearly 90mph, drank from a bottle of tequila, got stopped and arrested, and verbally abused the officers in charge. As situations go, it wasn't very striking, except that the drunk was a Hollywood star. It certainly wasn't unusual that the arrested person issued a stream of abuse at the police, racist, misogynist or otherwise. All police will tell you this is standard. Gibson reportedly said "F---ing Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world."

Silly man - pathetic, even. There isn't an ounce of reason in what Gibson said, but then, who could expect there to be? Well, the entire Western world, apparently, which imagines that what a drunk Catholic actor says in the extremity of his cups might represent a threat to civilisation.


The world at present is many kinds of daft, but one of the idiocies we never seem to comment on is the worldwide propensity to knock everything out of proportion. Gibson is not an admirable man (nor, in my view, a very talented actor) and his opinions on most things, from Christ to homosexuality, have always seemed pretty bonkers. But I don't understand why he must now be crucified himself for saying the kind of stupid thing that stupid people say all the time.

If we peel back the layers of the Gibson fiasco, we see something much darker and more troubling, not about him - he's just a fool - but about the society which needs to produce a scapegoat in him.

Dangerously worded as it was, Gibson's drunken comment was, it could reasonably be argued, a statement against the arrogance of the Israeli military "They started all the wars in the world." Isn't it that which is making America call for his head?

Of course it isn't even remotely true that Jews are behind most wars, but it is true that they are behind most movies, and pundits are saying that Gibson may never work again in Hollywood. But their response is overbearing and slightly hysterical if black or Hispanic or Asian people sought action every time a ludicrous remark was made against them by a drunkard, the world would fall to pieces.

We live in a country that, not 50 years ago, used to have signs in many boarding-house windows saying "No Blacks. No Dogs. No Irish". Nobody liked it, and some took action, but if Irish or black people (or Asians, or Poles) took to heart everything said against them in pubs, our jails would be crammed to the gills with name-callers, even today.

There's a problem here. Jews, and by extension Israelis, are un-insultable in ethnic terms, though everybody else is. I know it's hard to tell a people who saw six million of their number murdered to turn the other cheek, but turn the other cheek they must, unless they want to present themselves as the great unimpeachable race apart.

Gibson's absurd remark should be like water off a duck's back, but no in the eyes of American Jews, it is a sin against nature, and he must be punished to within an inch of his life.

In the present Middle East crisis - and since the horror of 9/11 overall - it has become pretty impossible to make any remarks about Jews or against Israel which are not immediately seen to be either monstrously anti-Semitic, or indicative of supporting terrorism. The thought-police are out in force in almost every publication in America, and to suggest that the Israeli lobby has an undue weight on American foreign policy - as two writers did recently in the London Review of Books - can cause a storm of protest, much of it insinuating that the authors or the publications concerned hate Jews.

Further, it is suggested that any Jews who criticize Israeli actions are self-hating. These seem to me to be insults of a much more worrying kind.

You can't police thoughts; and only a fool would seek to police the rantings of a drunken actor. Hollywood Jews, in the last century, were often the very people who fought for liberal freedoms - of speech, of thought, of political complexion - and their recent oversensitivity to insult puts them in the seat of their former enemies, the McCarthyites who once sought to silence so many of them.

American debate has shrivelled in recent times, and I do not mistake Gibson's ranting for the tradition of dissent that once glorified the American scene. Yet I cannot believe that overreacting to people such as him can do the cause of free speech any favours. There are many hundreds of millions in the world who believe that the Jewish state is a force of incredible arrogance and self-interest, and though the cause of such believers will in no way be forwarded by the ravings of a drunken man, neither will Israel be helped by those who turn silly insults into abominations.

There seems to be no question of forgiveness for Mel Gibson. No question of proportion, to say nothing of understanding for a damaged person struggling with the nightmare of alcoholism. We need not plead his case, but perhaps, in the midst of the mass execration now engulfing him, we should remind ourselves that no people which cares for balance and calmness - not even God's people - should assume itself to exist above the common miseries of man."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let's think if he had made a comment, like someone on a blog said, "F#$%Islamofacist Muslims.... they are responsible for all the wars in the world." Mel would be recognized as a national hero-maybe a slap on the wrist- and got a purple heart for it. This is what happens when the media is controlled by one ethnic group, this country is not far from becoming a totalitarian state.

Something else said was the fact that Hollywood is quite happy to do movies on gay priest catholics that abuse children, but please do not make a pro-catholic movie, the industry will label anyone as anti-Jew. I could not agree more.

Really, his "Braveheart" and "Patriot" roles were very anti English. He never had to profusely apologize to us because we weren't particularly bothered, nor does being anti wasp illicit much public outcry.

I think he probably said it because the arresting officer was Jewish and he was pissed off that this one was actually arresting him. Rumour has it he has been let off in the past for doing the same thing.

There was a lot of truth to the article and I think the world has a lot more to worry about than what some drunken twerp says.

Like Dianey, I think there is a lot of truth in the article, and that we should all worry a little less about the rants of some drunk. I've heard a lot worse.
However I am troubled by something you say posh
"This is what happens when the media is controlled by one ethnic group, this country is not far from becoming a totalitarian state"

Are you saying the media *is* controlled by one ethnic group? If yes, which and why do you believe this?

It is as usual a lot of fuss over a minor thing when there are poeple all over hte world dieing from hunger , decease ,or agression .

Even so some of the same people who wont to * forgive him * are the same folks who would have his head on a plate should he have dared to use the words n**g** , ,f*g w*t***k .

alcohol brings out the true personality and he has been known to say anti jewish statements before .
I agree the incident was uninportant when related to the mass injustice and cruelty that millions of fellow humans suffer in the world , and those who perport to protect the weak, abused ,and underprivileged should spend more of there time helping to solve theses problems , instead of raising hell over some idiot who mumbles some thoughs that were present in his subconscious mind when his control was weakened by a excess of alcohol .

But lets be fair to all, as im sure most offenders of pc rules are genuinly sorry for what they said when reflecting on it in the light of day .

lets have some of those who say *forgive him * show the same compassion when judging characters such as .marge shultz , jimmy the greek , howard stern , etc .

I didnt hear a whimper of * lets forgive him /her * when the unfortunate uttering of these folks where being discussed .

Although im not a supporter of PC (people only feel offended if they want to ) i do see a distinction /predudice in the pc police brigade as to who is protected from insulting or hurtfull talk and who isnt .

jesse jackson can call jews * hymies * and no protest from the pc police .
louis farragon can call jews *pigs * and not a sound from the keepers of the pc book of laws .
mel gibson can blame the jews for all the wars and deny the hollocast and the PC growd calls for forgiveness

But if anybody Dared to say anything deprimental ( in jest , contructive or otherwise ) agianst the A/A race or even uses a slang word ( f*g etc ) to discribe homesexuals the big guns of the pc police are out in force and after blood

lets get it right we either* forgive* all are none which would you have ?

John, I don't have the time to search for evidence and links right now, but this part of your post is total tripe.
My recollection is of one almighty hoo haa when Jackson made that comment. The notion that the Anti Defamation League would turn the other cheek to Jackson or Farrakan is absurd.

There is a difference between wishing one had not made a certain statement because it brought a load of grief, and wishing one had not made it because it did not represent one's real thinking

There is a difference in apologising, and in asking for forgiveness. The one does not imply the other.

Gibson may be antisemitic, in which case he was apologising to get people off his back. He might not be antisemitic, and simply picked on a characteristic of the man and attacked with whatever came to mind, drunks sometimes do that. I know that he apologized, the headlines told me so, I couldn't be bothered to watch the actual statement.

Marge Schott apologised with a bad grace, she was forced to. Jimmy the Greek looked around and drew an obvious conclusion, kicking him out was an obscenity. I don't like Howard Stern, you are welcome to him as long as I don't have to suffer him, he is an openly nasty person. Gibson isn't.

Farrakhan did not apologise, or ask for forgiveness, his statement represented his belief.

Jesse Jacksons "Hymie" and "Hymietown" were, I think, spoken out of ignorance, Hymie was used in the community as a nickname, but not as a perjorative. When I was in my last years at secondary school, the big deal was to get enough money to buy a N****r Brown gaberdine suit, or at least the slacks, which could be worn with an oatmeal coloured tweed jacket. We had no idea that N****r was a perjorative, we had come across it in many books! and not told it was anything but a proper form.

I put the original post up as a "Touchy Issue" joke.

Somebody, in a discussion, said that part of President Bush's rigidity comes from being a recovered alcoholic. They tend to used things as anchors or things to which to journey without swerving. I have no knowledge of this, but it didn't sound too off-the-wall. If Gibson has been through a recovery program, that might explain his apparent fixations, I agree he is anti English, and there were things in the "Passion" that would have been gratuitous if they were not governed by a belief system.

If anyone wants real forgiveness from me, I will give it, but not if it is only a formal transaction witth no intrinsic meaning.

There again NONE of us know what the the *REAL * character of celebs are just what we are told by the press and publicity agent unless of course they are one of our friends or family .

Howard almost certainly is not for everyone his on air *persona * eans him a lot of enimies and over the 25 years plus he has been broadcasting its also earned him many many millions . he has millions of loyal followers
I bought satallite radio so i could listen to him every weekday morning as i have since 1982 .

I dont care at all for Gibson , his movies , opinions or his persona but like stern he has made millions of bucks and like stern has milions of loyal followers .

I quess there is some celeb out there for everybody its just we dont all l enjoy the same entertainment .

And with celebs what you see is NOT always what you get .

Rob, I am fortunate enough to speak 3 other languages- French, Spanish and Portuguese. When I take a look around to see what other countries are saying about a certain issue, I am sure to see, from time-to-time, news that does not get coverage here. The American audience does not get all the information from the media, they get snapshots. CNN, 20thCentury Fox, CBS, are all an example of a media controlled by one ethnic group-I dare to say the name and be accused of something else here!

Just take a look on Natalie Holloway case. She got more coverage than President Mugabe on that week, more than Reyna Gabriella Alvarado-Carrera. Just google the name of these 2 girls and one can see the disparity. The media controlled who got more coverage. Why should the Holloway get more coverage than Reyna? Is it because she is caucasian and there is a profile to fit? What about the war in Iraq? What about this new conflict between Israel and Lebanon? Do we get all the information that we should have? I always, always, look at other news source and news channels to get my information, I don't trust the media here just because they are always for the caucasian, middle class family story and are very pro-Israel and may I say, one-sided. I want to see fair and unbiased news, which has been proven to be hard to find here.

What about when you are drunk you speak total shit and that girl over there is a looker, when infact she's a road traffic accident waiting to happen.

Again it sells. If it was another poor sod no one knew. It would not make the local paper. Geeze

Couldn't agree more Posh.

He played Fletcher Christian too.........The bastard :evil: :wink:

He should be apologising for his ridiculous scottish accent in Braveheart :wink:

Bad luck Mel - what comes around, goes around and all that.

Maybe he had already got the anti-British, rabble-rousing stuff off his chest but it's a bit of a wake-up call, in case he had more in store or a new country to villify.

Normally I would totally agree with you. But I couldn't help noticing that this time with the conflict with Israel, there are media inside Lebanon showing how bad it is there. OK, there is an pro-Israel slant on it but there does seem more to what is being reported than just pro-Israel. It's as if the media are being careful to not rock the boat but by the same token they don't like what Israel are doing.

I could be totally wrong and haven't watched that much news but what I have seen, there just seems more to it this time that we usually see.

Just the fact that they are pro-Israel on every issue means to me that the news is totally biased. They cannot be even handed, sure the news corp. don't want to rock the boat (I am sure people would like to keep their jobs) and if they didn't like what is going on, on both sides, they would have said it. Yeah, they cannot hide the death of 37 kids, plus all the civilians deaths, my last check was 900 people. What do(Israel) they expect? Drop leaflets saying to everyone leave, then they bomb the cars leaving and civilian infrastructure? The Israeli State is as bad as Hizbollah and other terrorist organization. Sure they have the right to defend themselves, but at what costs? They have mounts of civil rights violations, I have posted before a link to an Israeli organization which fights for the rights of the people living in the occupied territories. There aren't angels on this conflict, but the Israeli people should be ashamed of all the civilian death and the people of Lebanon should be ashamed of a government that cannot control its own country. I have said it before, that violence only brings violence.