PDA

View Full Version : George Clooney Arrested at Sudanese Embassy



Rockntractor
03-16-2012, 11:40 AM
By DANA HUGHES (@dana_hughes)
March 16, 2011

Movie star George Clooney was led away in handcuffs after storming the Sudanese Embassy protesting the actions of the country's president Omar Al-Bashir, an alleged war criminal.

Clooney made the rounds in Washington this week, hoping his superstar wattage will help shine a light on the situation in Sudan. The actor testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and held private meetings with the Secretary of State and President Obama about the African nation's dire humanitarian situation and the Obama administration's policy. He led a protest today outside of Sudan's embassy calling on Omar Al-Bashir, an alleged war-criminal, to stop the violence and allow humanitarian aid into the country.

Also among those arrested were Clooney's Father Nick Clooney, President of United to End Genocide and former Congressman Tom Andrews, Congressmen Jim McGovern, D-MA, Al Green, D-TX), Jim Moran, D-VA., and John Olver D-MA, Martin Luther King III, NAACP President Ben Jealous, and Enough Project Co-Founder John Prendergast, according to a police statement.

The Hollywood actor has been working with the John Prendergast from the advocacy group the Enough Project for years. He co-founded the Sudan Sentinel Project, which tracks human rights abuses on the border of Sudan and South Sudan using satellite cameras. Clooney's said in the past that he wants to draw attention to the atrocities Al-Bashir's allegedly directed against his own people for decades, to "make him famous."

Read More>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/george-clooney-arrested-sudan-embassy-washington-dc/story?id=15936415#.T2Nd_KhBz2p

SarasotaRepub
03-16-2012, 01:02 PM
Oh...he was arrested here in the US, not da Sudan. What a hero!!!! :rolleyes:

namvet
03-16-2012, 01:08 PM
was he sober??? :biggrin-new:

Janice
03-16-2012, 03:36 PM
George Clueless arrested again? With a gaggle of fringe looney friends I see ...

What an insult to intelligent life forms.

Odysseus
03-16-2012, 04:36 PM
Clooney's said in the past that he wants to draw attention to the atrocities Al-Bashir's allegedly directed against his own people for decades, to "make him famous."

Saddam Hussein committed atrocities against his own people for decades, but the minute we invaded, Clooney began working to undermine us. From discoverthenetworks.org:



Prior to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, Clooney said, "Are we going to try and talk [to Saddam Hussein] without jumping in and killing people first? I don't believe we're going to wait until the last resort to do it. That's what bothers me."

During the same time period, Clooney stated on Charlie Rose's PBS program that pursuing war with Iraq, while not doing so with North Korea (vis a vis its illegally developed nuclear weapons program), illustrates how "we're picking on people we can beat." "First and foremost," he elaborated, "is the idea that we're going to kill a lot of innocent people, that's what we're going to do. That's what we did before [in Iraq] and it's what we're going to do again. And, the truth is, we're going to go in and negotiate with North Korea because they have a bomb, because we don't want to get involved in a fight that could result in a real problem." "We moved away," he added, "from what we were going after [in the wake of 9/11], which was the al-Qaeda, and there's no connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq."

Disparaging President Bush's 2002 "axis of evil" reference to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, Clooney said, "Listen to the language! 'Evil.' 'Evil'? 'Nexus of evil'? 'Evil-doer'? That's my favorite, 'evil-doer'! What's wrong with their vocabulary: couldn't they come up with 'schmuck'?"

In March 2006, Clooney expressed his anger at Democrats for not taking a tougher stance against the Iraq War:


"The fear of [being] criticized can be paralyzing. Just look at the way so many Democrats caved in the run up to the war. In 2003, a lot of us were saying, where is the link between Saddam and bin Laden? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? We knew it was bullshit. Which is why it drives me crazy to hear all these Democrats saying, ‘We were misled.’ It makes me want to shout, ‘F*** you, you weren't misled. You were afraid of being called unpatriotic.’"

In Clooney's view, war as a means of solving international disputes has become anachronistic. “You can't beat your enemy anymore through wars,” he says; “instead you create an entire generation of people revenge-seeking.”

Clooney advocates the deployment of a “multi-national” peace-keeping force to end the tribal wars in the Darfur region of western Sudan. Along with fellow actors Brad Pitt, Matt Damon and Don Cheadle, Clooney is one of the organizers of Not on Our Watch (NOW), a humanitarian group that seeks to focus global attention on Darfur.



So, let me understand this: Clooney wants a peace-keeping force to go to Darfur and end the jihad, but he thinks that war doesn't work. I guess the word "schmuck" was already in use. What a tool.

Lanie
03-16-2012, 07:56 PM
Good for Clooney.

Sudan is known for their genocide after all.

JB
03-16-2012, 08:29 PM
Wait. I'm calling some kind of shenanigans on this. Didn't he just meet with Barry (like yesterday) on this?

He's has a meeting with Barry to talk about the Sudan and then he's arrested at the Sudan embassay. OK. I was born at night but it wasn't last night.

I'm curious, did the embassay staff have a caviar and champagne spread on scene for them as they waited to be processed? :single_eye:

Bailey
03-17-2012, 10:40 AM
First I heard of this I thought "wow what a tough guy to get arrested in the US of A" why dont he man up and go over to that shit hole and get arrested.

AmPat
03-17-2012, 10:56 AM
They keep mispelling his name; it's Clowney.

Odysseus
03-17-2012, 05:36 PM
Good for Clooney.

Sudan is known for their genocide after all.

Yeah, he showed them a thing or two. :rolleyes:

If we actually did what was necessary to stop the genocide, which is to put troops on the ground, the "Save Darfur" bumper stickers would be replaced with "US out of Darfur" so fast that your head would spin. These are the same moonbats who claimed to care about Iraqi children when we imposed sanctions, but couldn't bring themselves to condemn al Qaeda when they were blowing them up. I'll be damned if I'm going to put my life or the lives of my troops on the line just to make a bunch of idiotic Hollywood liberals feel good about their crusade du jour, especially when we all know that the minute that we get there, they'll stab us in the back.


They keep mispelling his name; it's Clowney.

No, it's George Clueless.

FlaGator
03-18-2012, 09:45 PM
Finally, a cause that George and I can agree on.

Odysseus
03-19-2012, 01:45 AM
Finally, a cause that George and I can agree on.

The difference is that George would turn on us in a heartbeat the minute that our boots hit the ground. He's a Quisling who'll sell us out for cheap political points if a Republican is in power.

wannaberocker
03-19-2012, 10:09 AM
Clooney is the posterchild for the high and mighty socialist in hollywood. Useless waste of space.

AmPat
03-19-2012, 10:59 AM
Clooney is the posterchild for the high and mighty socialist in hollywood. Useless waste of space.

Oh, I don't know. Sean Penn is a close competitor.

wannaberocker
03-19-2012, 11:10 AM
Oh, I don't know. Sean Penn is a close competitor.

well hes pretty much a commie. So Sean Penn is like 10 degree's ahead of Clonney.

Eupher
03-19-2012, 12:52 PM
I recently saw an interview with Clooney on "The Actor's Studio" in which he went into some detail about this "passion" he has about the Sudan.

To make a long story slightly less boring, he doesn't have a freaking clue about why he does what he does. He simply has the means to do so, and does.

Ody's absolutely right -- should boots hit the ground in Darfur/Sudan/African Hellhole of the Month, Clooney will be all over that like stink on shit.

Guys like Clooney simply have to have something to do with their time other than memorize their lines for their next movie. This is his purpose for getting out of bed in the morning.

Odysseus
03-19-2012, 03:18 PM
I recently saw an interview with Clooney on "The Actor's Studio" in which he went into some detail about this "passion" he has about the Sudan.

To make a long story slightly less boring, he doesn't have a freaking clue about why he does what he does. He simply has the means to do so, and does.

Ody's absolutely right -- should boots hit the ground in Darfur/Sudan/African Hellhole of the Month, Clooney will be all over that like stink on shit.

Guys like Clooney simply have to have something to do with their time other than memorize their lines for their next movie. This is his purpose for getting out of bed in the morning.

No, his purpose for getting out of bed in the morning is to get starlets into it at night. This is all about presenting himself as something more than an empty vessel for screen writers. I once told an actress who had given me her unsolicited opinions about our foreign policy that if I wanted to hear her say something intelligent, I'd hire a script writer and a dialogue coach for her. It was not a pleasant date. Clooney is the male version. He knows that he's a dunce, but wants to be taken seriously, so he pontificates about things that he thinks are important (and while the loss of life in Darfur is horrific, it's not as pressing as a nuclear Iran or North Korea), and then bask in the moral superiority that his position bestows on him. Of course, his activism is limited to futile, stupid activities like getting arrested in front of an embassy, instead of doing something that might actually put real pressure on the regime. For example, if he'd gone to Sudan and gotten arrested there, his celebrity might have actually created an outcry against the regime, but that would have also put him in harm's way, and we can't have that.

Clooney is demonstrating how much he cares about the horrors of the world, and how this makes him a better person than those of us who actually go to war in order to do something about them. He's a self-important clown, and he deserves our mockery and contempt.

noonwitch
03-19-2012, 03:29 PM
Finally, a cause that George and I can agree on.

Clooney was on The 700 Club last week. He obviously was trying to raise public awareness of the genocide in the Sudan, but he also made a point of giving credit to the christian agencies that are working in the area.

I usually watch the show to laugh at Pat, since he is getting silly in his old age and you never know what he's going to say next (I never thought Pat Robertson would advocate legalizing marijuana, but he did).

Clooney is not Sean Penn, he's not going on trips to Cuba or Venezuela and kissing up to dictators. He's trying to get people to donate money to charities that help the people of southern Sudan, a place where he visited and was obviously moved by the people's suffering.

Odysseus
03-19-2012, 05:18 PM
Clooney is not Sean Penn, he's not going on trips to Cuba or Venezuela and kissing up to dictators. He's trying to get people to donate money to charities that help the people of southern Sudan, a place where he visited and was obviously moved by the people's suffering.

Clooney is Sean Penn-Lite. His movie, Syriana, blames the US for the violence in the Middle East (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Clooney%20Proud%20to%20Be%20Labeled.html).


Even more dispiriting news comes from the Hollywood Reporter that Clooney's "Syriana" happens to be the top box office draw overseas right now. This is immensely depressing, in that "Syriana's" basic premise is that both terrorism and the crushing of progressive reform movements in the middle East are products of a corrupt collusion between American oil companies and the American government. "Syriana" actually implies that if ever a reformist emir came to power in a major, oil-rich Arab state - that emir would be assassinated by our government if he didn't sign lucrative oil deals with American companies.

He has repeatedly slandered American troops as murderers of innocent people (http://www.wnd.com/2003/01/16830/):


Clooney says Bush has cut deals with France and Russia so the United Nations Security Council won’t complain when “we go into a war [with Iraq] and kill a lot of innocent people.”

“[Bush says,] ‘France, you’re getting the pipelines,’” Clooney quips. “Are we going to try and talk [to Saddam Hussein] without jumping in and killing people first?” asks Clooney. “I don’t believe we’re going to wait until the last resort to do it. That’s what bothers me.”

He is a vile partisan who will stoop to Alzheimer's jokes at the expense of conservatives who are suffering from it, like Charlton Heston:


In receiving a special filmmaking achievement award from the National Board of Reviews, actor George Clooney joked that “Charlton Heston announced again today that he is suffering from Alzheimer’s.”

Clooney still had a chance to apologize for the bad humor day. When questioned about the remark by New York Newsday, Clooney sputtered: “I don’t care. Charlton Heston is the head of the National Rifle Association. He deserves whatever anyone says about him.”

The only reason that he's not considered as loony as Sean Penn is because Clooney hasn't gone to Iraq to be a human shield, or shilled for Hugo Chavez. He's a better looking, more suave version of Penn, but he's still a despicable liar.

Eupher
03-19-2012, 05:28 PM
No, his purpose for getting out of bed in the morning is to get starlets into it at night. This is all about presenting himself as something more than an empty vessel for screen writers. I once told an actress who had given me her unsolicited opinions about our foreign policy that if I wanted to hear her say something intelligent, I'd hire a script writer and a dialogue coach for her. It was not a pleasant date. Clooney is the male version. He knows that he's a dunce, but wants to be taken seriously, so he pontificates about things that he thinks are important (and while the loss of life in Darfur is horrific, it's not as pressing as a nuclear Iran or North Korea), and then bask in the moral superiority that his position bestows on him. Of course, his activism is limited to futile, stupid activities like getting arrested in front of an embassy, instead of doing something that might actually put real pressure on the regime. For example, if he'd gone to Sudan and gotten arrested there, his celebrity might have actually created an outcry against the regime, but that would have also put him in harm's way, and we can't have that.

Clooney is demonstrating how much he cares about the horrors of the world, and how this makes him a better person than those of us who actually go to war in order to do something about them. He's a self-important clown, and he deserves our mockery and contempt.

Well, far be it from me to interfere with your Clooney-bashing (you're pretty good at it! :bravo:) but Clooney has been to Darfur at least a couple of times -- Oct. 2010 and then a month or so ago.

So while he's got his knickers in a knot, he at least heads off to the wild corners of Africa where, perhaps just like Hillary, his plane gets shot at or the boat he's on with Ann Curry of NBC develops a leak or some other dangerous activity.

Adam Wood
03-19-2012, 06:17 PM
To Clooney's credit, he did the Sunday talk circuit yesterday and he said pretty clearly that military intervention was not practical for this, and that his particular goal was to raise awareness and hopefully very tough multi-lateral sanctions against these tin-pot dictators. I considered this just another dumbass stunt until I saw his interviews yesterday. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for what he's saying.

That having been said, I'm not seeing these folks really folding to sanctions any time soon. AFAIC, we're just looking at Mogadishu all over again, and no amount of sanctions or international pizza-delivery-by-troop-carrier missions is likely to make a dent over there.

Odysseus
03-19-2012, 10:24 PM
Well, far be it from me to interfere with your Clooney-bashing (you're pretty good at it! :bravo:) but Clooney has been to Darfur at least a couple of times -- Oct. 2010 and then a month or so ago.

So while he's got his knickers in a knot, he at least heads off to the wild corners of Africa where, perhaps just like Hillary, his plane gets shot at or the boat he's on with Ann Curry of NBC develops a leak or some other dangerous activity.

He's a grief tourist. He goes to the safe refugee camps, feels their pain and then comes back to wallow in virtue. I'm not impressed.


To Clooney's credit, he did the Sunday talk circuit yesterday and he said pretty clearly that military intervention was not practical for this, and that his particular goal was to raise awareness and hopefully very tough multi-lateral sanctions against these tin-pot dictators. I considered this just another dumbass stunt until I saw his interviews yesterday. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for what he's saying.

That having been said, I'm not seeing these folks really folding to sanctions any time soon. AFAIC, we're just looking at Mogadishu all over again, and no amount of sanctions or international pizza-delivery-by-troop-carrier missions is likely to make a dent over there.

Clooney is an idiot. He claims that military intervention isn't practical, but what does he think that peacekeepers are? Sanctions will fail because the Sudanese get more from their exploitation of Darfur than they do from trade with us, and most Arab countries will ignore the sanctions. Does Clooney really believe that a Sudanese jihadist is going to forego the pleasures of taking a chattel slave in order to fix Sudan's trade deficit with the US?

Regardless, the only thing that works when an evil force oppresses a weaker victim is the introduction of a superior force. That means either US boots on the ground, or US weapons and trainers to strengthen the people of Darfur (what do they call themselves, anyway? Darfurians? Darfurites? Darfurious?) so that they can defend themselves, which will ultimately be the long term solution regardless of any short term fix. Clooney doesn't understand that there is genuine evil in the world, and so he makes pious pronouncements and demands policies that cannot work in order to make himself feel virtuous, but his warm fuzzy feeling isn't worth a single one of my troops' lives.