Censoring September 11th

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
nathan1977 said:
You may be a fascist without being a terrorist, but can you be a terrorist without being a fascist?

Yes.

Those that are using these terms interchangeably need to buy a dictionary.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Well of course.
I don't think the honest answer is "of course" for many people who are against taking out the swearing. I think that if I posted a topic "Censoring 9/11: They took out the spoken prayers", I think that I would be laughed at and scoffed and ridiculed.
 
80sU2isBest said:

I don't think the honest answer is "of course" for many people who are against taking out the swearing. I think that if I posted a topic "Censoring 9/11: They took out the spoken prayers", I think that I would be laughed at and scoffed and ridiculed.

And I think you are playing victim...

I hear this a lot, but funny enough never see it.:huh:
 
nathan1977 said:
You may be a fascist without being a terrorist, but can you be a terrorist without being a fascist?

Yes, of course. However, ultra-liberal terrorism is generally a smaller phenomenon. The Earth Liberation Front (ELF) is a modern example, while the Québec Liberation Front (FLQ) was a Canadian example in the 1960s.

Melon
 
I think 80s U2IsTheBest's scenario is quite reasonable; I don't think it would be too far-fetched for some producer or affiliate to say "We don't need to include those prayers because it may inflame some religious sensitivities." Obviously, we haven't heard reports of it happening, but it wouldn't absolutely shock me. Some people may say "This show shouldn't seek to advance certain spiritual beliefs."

I don't think 80sU2IsTheBest is being ridiculous at all.

~U2Alabama
 
I understood the call of "being ridiculous" was to 80s thinking he'd be laughed at, scoffed at and ridiculed if he posted that prayers had been cut from a documentary.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


And I think you are playing victim...

I hear this a lot, but funny enough never see it.:huh:
Nope, I am basing this on reactions I have seen toward issues of in this forum.

Just today, someone called the belief in God "foolish". There are many times that I have seen people who do not believe in God ridicule those who do believe in God. Why would I think it would be any different if the subject were prayers in a movie?
 
80sU2isBest said:
Nope, I am basing this on reactions I have seen issues of faith get in these forums.

Just today, someone called the belief in God "foolish". There are many times that I have seen people who do not believe in God ridicule those who do believe in God. Why would I think it would be any different if the subject were prayers in a movie?

What do these have to do with each other? Despite what that poster believes if he was a good documentary maker and was documenting this what would they gain by taking out or censoring prayer?

That's the point I don't get, what would someone gain?
 
I'm pretty sure there's a Sting2 quote somewhere that gave the imprimateur of approval to terrorist tactics in certain limited cases (eg. the American Revolutionary War). And America isn't a fascist nation, right?

Oh god this shit is just so fucking INSANE! Swear words!?? JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, there's some profanity (born of frustration) from this morally relativist librul to your ears, gang.
 
god, who fucking cares? i'm not saying this to be ironic. really, who cares. what is ironic is the 9/11 thing is on at the moment, and when you watch the recreations of the MS delegates on floor 107, who DOES honestly care about some swearing? if anyone does, then they have issues. that's some fucked up sense of importance right there.
 
You know, I don't know why these FCC complaints even work anymore. I mean, these "family" organizations got what they wanted a few years back. They got their detailed TV ratings and their V-Chips, so if they want to "protect their children," they can use their V-Chip to ban absolutely everything that isn't "TV-Y."

I mean, why are we letting the most conservative of people in this country consistently dictate to the rest of us what we can't do all the time? If they don't like it, they don't have to watch.

Melon
 
"Seems like some special interest groups own tv networks."

Really? Which ones does the AFA own?

Look, I think the AFA's stance on this film is ridiculous. I think -- knowing the filmmakers involved -- that the film promotes the exact qualities the AFA would want to exalt -- heroism, self-sacrifice, duty to country, etc. At the same time, the cries of "fascism" and the equating on this board of the AFA with genuine terrorists is absolutely ridiculous, and more than a little troubling. This is America. Special interest groups have the right to lobby for whatever they'd like, and they do, whether it's GLAAD lobbying for more gay characters on TV or the AFA demanding swear words removed from a TV program airing during the "family hour." If you want to restrict their right to lobby for whatever they'd like -- even if it offends you -- then in some ways you are betraying your own fascistic tendencies. And let's face it, fascism can come as much from the left as from the right.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to restrict anyone's right to lobby and I haven't called them fascists, however I maintain my right to believe and say that the AFA (or the FCC) making an issue over swear words in a 9/11 documentary is completely ridiculous and asinine. And insulting to everyone's intelligence and to the memory of what happened that day.
 
This whole thing is not only ridiculous, it's positively OBSCENE, as cable networks are not subject to the same strict regulations. This is not 1985, when cable was watched by a small proportion of the US population. What is the percentage of US houseolds with cable? A LOT. And yet, filthy language, violence, and vivid sound effects of male gay sex (Angels In America--the Central Park at night scene, folks?) abound, and cable is not fined or regulated, all because politicians still are stuck in a time warp and believe that just b/c "cable isn't seen by as many peopleand therefore isn't as dangerous." If only they knew how much adult programming is watched by kids when both working parents aren't around at night and in the evening. Do you think they watch only the Disney Channel and Nick at Nite? COME ON. But cable makes certain people a ton of mon ey, so it won't ever be regulated.....HYPOCRITES.....
 
Kieran McConville said:

Oh god this shit is just so fucking INSANE! Swear words!?? JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, there's some profanity (born of frustration) from this morally relativist librul to your ears, gang.

There's something wrong with the mind that enjoys offending people's sensibilities just for the "fun" of it. Oh yeah, that's right, it's called "being a jerk".
 
Teta040 said:
This whole thing is not only ridiculous, it's positively OBSCENE, as cable networks are not subject to the same strict regulations. This is not 1985, when cable was watched by a small proportion of the US population. What is the percentage of US houseolds with cable? A LOT. And yet, filthy language, violence, and vivid sound effects of male gay sex (Angels In America--the Central Park at night scene, folks?) abound, and cable is not fined or regulated, all because politicians still are stuck in a time warp and believe that just b/c "cable isn't seen by as many peopleand therefore isn't as dangerous."

Cable by definition can't be regulated, since it's not broadcast on public (i.e., UHF and VHF) frequencies. Cable programs run on regulated channels are doctored for television (such as "Sex and the City", which famously re-shot or re-edited its episodes to conform to FCC standards).
 
nathan1977 said:
Cable by definition can't be regulated, since it's not broadcast on public (i.e., UHF and VHF) frequencies. Cable programs run on regulated channels are doctored for television (such as "Sex and the City", which famously re-shot or re-edited its episodes to conform to FCC standards).

You're partly correct. Premium cable, like HBO and Showtime, is unregulated, because it's seen as a paid extra on top of extended basic cable. But with that, extended basic cable is, indeed, subject to FCC regulation. However, it is less regulated than broadcast television, because, again, if you don't like the nature of cable, you have the option of cancelling it and no longer paying for it.

Melon
 
Teta040 said:
And yet, filthy language, violence, and vivid sound effects of male gay sex (Angels In America--the Central Park at night scene, folks?) abound, and cable is not fined or regulated, all because politicians still are stuck in a time warp and believe that just b/c "cable isn't seen by as many peopleand therefore isn't as dangerous."

Ah yes, when in doubt, muck up all the gay fearmongering. As if vivid sound effects of heterosexual sex are any less "dangerous."

Melon
 
80sU2isBest said:


There's something wrong with the mind that enjoys offending people's sensibilities just for the "fun" of it. Oh yeah, that's right, it's called "being a jerk".

Agreed, in this instance. Someone was trying to push your buttons.

~U2Alabama
 
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - CBS Corp. said on Saturday it would broadcast the documentary "9/11" on the Internet as well as the airwaves after several affiliates said they would delay or forgo the award-winning film because it includes profanity.

The documentary was produced by French filmmakers Gedeon and Jules Naudet and retired New York firefighter James Hanlon and has aired twice without incurring fines by U.S. regulators charged with enforcing broadcast decency standards.

CBS said affiliates that cover about 10 percent of the United States had decided not broadcast the program or would show it late at night, citing concerns they could be fined for airing profanity, primarily by firefighters during the crisis, before 10 p.m.

The American Family Association, which describes itself as a Christian organization promoting traditional values, has called on CBS stations to forgo or delay the "9/11" broadcast.

"The online streaming of this broadcast will allow viewers in those markets to see the Peabody Award-winning special," CBS said in a statement. The network will air warnings about graphic language.

The film is scheduled to air on Sunday evening at 8 p.m.
 
I must be a really, really, really bad person. Cause this is the reaction I get when I reveal just a tiny portion of my true view on things.

Honestly, I must be hellbound. But, at least I won't be in the same hell as the rest of you.

PUSHING YOUR BUTTONS!!!? THIS WHOLE FORUM PUSHES MY BUTTONS 24/7. But it's not within my control, so I go away for a while and do something else instead.

U280sisbest, you can be offended by me if you wish. I know you will. It's not all about you and your Christian beliefs. There are other Christians here. I'm one of them, after a fashion at least. After a crooked fashion.

In this case you can rest assured you have more friends than I do.
 
I watched this last night and it was just as powerful as when I saw it the first time. And I don't really recall a whole bunch of swearing. I guess I was too busy freaking out and crying over seeing the planes slam into the towers, the sounds of people jumping to their deaths, the late Father Mychal Judge being carried out of the building by the firefighters, the towers crumbling, and so on.
 
Back
Top Bottom