The Lies Of MIchael Moore [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

TheMojoPin

06-22-2004, 09:30 AM

How is a comparison to Goebbels applicable?!?

The man produced propganda for Hitler and the Nazis. As desperately as pundits try to make it up, Moore isn't "working for the left," as if it were some kind of organization that pays him or tells him what to do, nor is he producing anything that even remotely calls for the discrimination and MURDER of an entire race of people.

Moore is a pundit himself. He's no better or worse than Coulter, Franken, Hannity, O'Reilly and their ilk, so quit trying to paint him like he's actually comparable to a monstrous figure like Goebbels.

Se7en, I've seen you rightfully get up in arms when people trot out the old "Republicans = Nazis" bullshit, so please don't play the flaming hypocrite now and agree with a similar opinion just because it's targeted at "the other side."

And enough of people "revealing" Moore's "biases." The man never claimed he was unbiased, and has actually typically trumpeted his agendas well before his films/books/TV shows are released, whether people wanted to hear about them or not. The only time somebody is obligated to be "unbiased" in a media setting is if they actually go out of their way to claim to be just that.

The man makes documentaries. Documentaries are automatically personally biased towards the views of the filmmaker. It's part of the "flaws" of human nature. We have opinions. If people don't agree with Moore all the time, fantastic. He's far from being right all the time, so he doesn't deserve a "free pass." But that people who both support and oppose him continually try to put him up on some kind of mythical higher standard as a filmmaker that is constantly reaching more and more ridiculous proportions is getting completely out of hand.

Insulting and criticizing Moore all the time is a convenient way to never address any of the points he brings up. Constantly praising and supporting him conveniently allows people to never question or carefully analyze whether he's right or not in the first place.

Michael Moore is a walking diversionary tactic.

I hate you all.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 6-22-04 @ 1:40 PM

DarkHippie

06-22-2004, 09:44 AM

I think the problem with Moore, like the problem with most documentary makers, is that he doesn't always back up his claims, or if he does, he uses sources that are biased. Of course all interview sources are biased whether they know it or not, and even hard data can be interpreted in multiple ways.

The best that we can hope to do is watch the movie, take in the information, and come to our own conclusions.

<IMG SRC=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/eo.jpg>
<marquee> Check out DarkHippie's latest story, "Keeper", at http://home.pcisys.net/~drmforge/dftoc2.htm </marquee>

TheMojoPin

06-22-2004, 09:48 AM

Very true. I've always said his methods and sources should be questioned if he's going to bash us over the head with them. I'm just pissed he's become such a rallying point for people who either support or oppose him, and everyone seems to ignore the actual issues the guy is wrongly or rightly (Factually-speaking) addressing with his works.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

JerryTaker

06-22-2004, 11:19 AM

everyone seems to ignore the actual issues the guy is wrongly or rightly (Factually-speaking) addressing with his works.

Exactly. Meanwhile people want to say things like, "Bush couln't possibly be in leauge with the Saudis, because Micheal Moore's been in four movies that weren't his own!" huh?

That's one of the worst thing to come out of the times we live in. There's no empathy or intellectual discussion or open-mindedness, just "whoever talks louder wins"

 
Sig Pending...

whoopsy

06-22-2004, 02:03 PM

That's one of the worst thing to come out of the times we live in. There's no empathy or intellectual discussion or open-mindedness, just "whoever talks louder wins"

stamp it..

was out in Philly this weekend with two of my best friends, both hard-core Repubs and they wouldn't shut the fuck up about Michael Moore, like the guy was Satan. Already there are a billion sites debunking what's in F911, and those that are pro-Bush are going to use these criticisms to dismiss the entire movie. I hate where we are right now in terms of political dialogue. My point to them was, I'll watch the movie with full knowledge that (a. statistics that are used may be gerrymandered to support Moore's claims b. when dealing with a documentary, you'll have a very specific point of view where all the filmmaker's claims are supported by arguments he presents) but I am sure there will be some very valid criticism of the president and the administration. Then I'll read all the articles bashing Moore's movie. Then I can have both sides. Unfortunately, most (IMO) who support GWB will say that Moore's complete bull shit and will never even listen to the arguments presented, they're already too busy studying up to tell me why I shouldn't pay attention to the movie. I honestly believe that there is a large segment of the population that would support Bush regardless how shitty he is, and a large segment of the population that would condemn Bush when he makes a move that is clearly good, and that just sucks..

- whoopsy -

El Mudo

06-22-2004, 02:40 PM

Is it me, or does bearded Michael Moore....

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/oscars/75th_academy_awards_luncheon_photos/michael_moore/lunch.jpg

...look a hell of a lot like Balls Mahoney?

http://www.monsterfactory.com/g_balls_mahoney.jpg

http://users.pandora.be/dave.depickere/Images/29th.gif
<marquee> States Rights are Dying... </marquee>

42nd-delay

06-22-2004, 04:36 PM

I think Heckler's just trying to get people riled up - since when does he post in the politics forum? :)

Supposedly, Moore's gone over this film with a fine-toothed comb, so I'll be surprised if there are any big mistakes.

------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

TheMojoPin

06-22-2004, 04:40 PM

It's not necessarily mistakes per se...it's how he frames and presents the information with the film. Selective editing goes a LONG way when making a documentary. And that's true for most documentaries. Rarely should ANY of them be taken as gospel. At best, they're pointers in the right direction.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

The Jays

06-22-2004, 06:44 PM

Exactly. Meanwhile people want to say things like, "Bush couln't possibly be in leauge with the Saudis, because Micheal Moore's been in four movies that weren't his own!" huh?

exactly. which is why we should present factual information. Like Richard Clake saying that he authorized the flights for the Saudi family, and it never got any higher than him.

[center] Fuck what you heard.

HBox

06-22-2004, 06:47 PM

TheMojoPin

06-22-2004, 07:01 PM

And what do Bush's dealings with the Saudi government have to do with the bin Ladens being flown out of America after 9/11?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Doomstone

06-22-2004, 07:17 PM

exactly. which is why we should present factual information. Like Richard Clake saying that he authorized the flights for the Saudi family, and it never got any higher than him.

From the article Hitchens linked to in his tirade:

When Roemer asked Clarke during the commission's March hearing, "Who gave the final approval, then, to say, `Yes, you're clear to go, it's all right with the United States government,'" Clarke seemed to suggest it came from the White House.

"I believe after the FBI came back and said it was all right with them, we ran it through the decision process for all these decisions that we were making in those hours, which was the interagency Crisis Management Group on the video conference," Clarke testified. "I was making or coordinating a lot of the decisions on 9-11 in the days immediately after. And I would love to be able to tell you who did it, who brought this proposal to me, but I don't know. The two - since you press me, the two possibilities that are most likely are either the Department of State or the White House chief of staff's office."

Clarke takes responsibility for allowing the flight to go through, but we don't know who requested it. This is consistent with what Hitchens claims Moore says. (Now I don't think that the flights meant that we let terrorists get away, it is more instructive to illustrate the strong influence that the Saudi government has on ours. I haven't seen the movie obviously, but I suspect that is Moore's point.)

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

ChickenHawk

06-22-2004, 07:17 PM

OH MY GOD! BALLS MAHONEY IS MICHAEL MOORE!

<IMG SRC="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=ChickenHawk">
HORDE KING FOREVER!!! ORACLE NEVER!!!
<strike>Shock</strike>
<marquee behavior=alternate>EMFA</marquee>[color=white]

FMJeff

06-22-2004, 11:38 PM

how many michael moore threads do we need on this board....

<center><img src="http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/fmjeff.gif">
 
It made my heart sing.

TheMojoPin

06-23-2004, 02:44 AM

Well, one was about a guest appearance on the R&F show that discussed Michael Moore...another was about a documentary about Michael Moore...and then we had this one. I looked back through the archives and found the only thread actually started about Moore himself was the F9/11 thread. The rest just devolved from the initial topic into talking about him.

What, you think I'M gonna pass up the chance to lock me some threads?!?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Ralphy Ramone

06-23-2004, 10:25 AM

In my day,I believe Mr.Moore would have been refered to as a Commie Pinko Fag.

http://sundogcreations.com/images/archie.jpg

<img src=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/turkishtaffy1/myhomepage/licplate.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

It's T.V.'s fault I am this way

El Mudo

06-23-2004, 12:37 PM

OH MY GOD! BALLS MAHONEY IS MICHAEL MOORE!

I was watching Wrestlepalooza 97 today, when Balls had short hair...the resemblance was even greater...

http://users.pandora.be/dave.depickere/Images/29th.gif
<marquee>This ol' earthquake's gonna leave me in the poorhouse...it seems like this whole town's insane.... </marquee>

The Jays

06-23-2004, 04:33 PM

Why is it that people who were going nuts discrediting Clarke a few months ago are now referencing him as a credible source?

EDIT:Let me clarify that I am not attempting to discredit Clarke.

This message was edited by HBox on 6-22-04 @ 10:55 PM

you should also clarify that you have no evidence of me trying to discredit Clarke several months ago.

[center] Fuck what you heard.

grlNIN

06-23-2004, 05:05 PM

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/oscars/75th_academy_awards_luncheon_photos/michael_moore/lunch.jpg

He looks like an Ewok.

I'm sorry that's all i have to add to this thread and Forum.

I'll be going now.

 
 <center><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=ninny">
 Don't know about you
but i am un chien andalusia</center>

fiestygal

06-24-2004, 05:48 PM

i think he looks more like a KOALA BEAR...

What did the 5 fingers say to the face..

SLAP! I'm Rick James BITCH!

<IMG SRC="http://tenbatsuzen.homestead.com/files/fiestysig1.jpg">

AIM- yelowrose1981

THANX TENB

Yerdaddy

06-24-2004, 07:06 PM

Hitchens is simply a master of hyperbole; he was that way when he was liberal and he's the same as a neocon now. Worthless.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

NewYorkDragons80

06-24-2004, 08:35 PM

Hitchens is a son of a bitch, but for the time being he is our son of a bitch. Just a vicious, venomous man. An absolute genius with the English language and good for a quote now and then, but ruthless nonetheless.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

blakjeezis

06-24-2004, 08:40 PM

I could not agree more, Dragon, he is relentless. I love seeing him on whatever show; he comes staggering on glass in one hand, cigarette in the other, three-quarters in the bag, and is still able to tear apart anyone who has the balls (or lack of brains) to try and go toe to toe with him. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the man is a complete pisser.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-25-04 @ 12:41 AM

HBox

06-24-2004, 08:57 PM

Hitchens lost all creditibility with me when I saw him on MSNBC a few months back flaunting one little memo that quite miraculously "proved" every single piece of rationale Bush provided for the war. A two year-old could have read that thing and tell it was fake.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

Yerdaddy

06-25-2004, 02:22 AM

Hitchens doesn't actually say anything though. I learned that when he did the magazine version of "The Trial of Henry Kissinger." I heard about it from one of two friends of mine who were written about in the article. So I was all excited to grab the article off the shelf and read it. But it was a huge dissappointment; it had the big British flair for flowery language but it didn't say anything. It was all hyperbole and no solid arguments. He sounds smart in interviews, but he's just a debating club sideshow - he may sound like he's making a goo argument, but he's not really saying anything.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Doctor Manhattan

06-25-2004, 04:13 AM

So if Moore is lying. Who's telling the truth?

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/vhsig02.jpg" border=0></a>

curtoid

06-25-2004, 04:29 AM

Desson Thompson's Review In The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2290-2004Jun24.html)

http://img21.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/44.jpg

"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 06:43 AM

So if Moore is lying. Who's telling the truth?

See, that's the thing, no one is. Lefty Lefterton is gonna say, "Well, I'm gonna take Michael Moore with a grain of salt." That doesn't discredit him, it just means they're trying to appear level-headed. At the same time, they will rant and rave about Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, whichever conservative pundits you want, and call them liars, fascists, put little Hitler mustaches on pictures of them, etc.

Conversely, all the Righty Rightertons, are gonna call Michael Moore the devil, and at the same time say, "Well, generally Hannity is good, if a bit over-zealous at times. I take him with a grain of salt." Once again trying to appear centrist. Just give it up. Putting stock in either one of them, Moore or Limbaugh, and what they say is stupid. neither of them are searching for truth or looking to help anyone. They're just out there trying to get their names known, make some dough, and advance their political agenda. In that order.

You will never find a liberal who'll call Michael Moore and out and out liar, and you'll never find a conservative who'll call Rush a fascist. Everyone's lying, everyone's supporting their own team. We're going to hell in a handbasket. Special interests run this country. Kerry and anyone else the Democrats will put up is not the answer. Same goes for Bush and the Republicans.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-25-04 @ 10:47 AM

TheMojoPin

06-25-2004, 08:56 AM

I say I'll take Moore with a grain of a salt because I know I'll see his films and I want to see his films. And no, he's not 100% incorrect. And neither are most pundits. But I choose to ignore the others, like Rush, Franken, Hannity, and Air America because they all basically offer the same thing as each other...but I still will pay at least some attention to Moore becuase NOBODY else, on either side, is making the kind of films he makes...truthful or not. It has been and still is a unique way to expose people to American politics. People that are smart enough and pay enough attention can sort through the fact and fiction and "twisting." People that can't...well, probably shouldn't be voting in the first place, sadly.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Doctor Manhattan

06-25-2004, 09:29 AM

..call them liars, fascists, put little Hitler mustaches on pictures of them, etc.

<img src="http://sanderhicks.com/images/hannityho.jpg">

You mean this isn't actually Hitler?

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/vhsig02.jpg" border=0></a>

TheMojoPin

06-25-2004, 09:58 AM

Hey, don't blame Jerry for that one. I saw it and I put it up there. He had nothing to do with it.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 11:01 AM

People that are smart enough and pay enough attention can sort through the fact and fiction and "twisting."

I'll quote a recent statement from a liberal we all know pretty well, "Don't pretend America reads the fine print."

If you take a conservative version of Michael Moore, I'll use Sean Hannity because I like him about as much as I like Moore and he's as much of a schill, the left has just about as much tolerance of his 'artistic licenses' as the right have for Michael Moore's. That's my point. Just like the right reject Moore, the left reject Hannity out of hand simply because he's conservative.

That's where my problem arises, it's all about consistency. Inconsistency reigns supreme in all these arguments, and I include myself, although I try like hell to be unbiased. People give their guy allowances they don't give the other guy. That's okay, I guess. It just really gets my goat when the inconsistent outrage gets unabashedly taken to the streets and shouted from the steeples, and people mistake it for truth. Seriously, there are thousands of people that are going to see Farhenheit 9/11 and believe every stinking frame.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

TheMojoPin

06-25-2004, 11:06 AM

I give Moore more slack becuase he's presenting a piece of work that can be analyzed and criticized and broken down if one wishes. Pretty much all other pundits only give us their word and expect us to go buy it. Moore CAN spin with his footage (And does constantly)...but it's much easier to catch him with what he does than the pundits that bury their spin in verbal rant after verbal rant.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 11:25 AM

Moore was on Stern this morning. Now for the brief 2 minutes that I listend to the circle jerk, Debbie Schleusshel (sic) called in and called him on 2 points. First his accusation that 'Bandar Bush' has a Secret Service guard when other ambassadors don't. Moore said that one of Bandar's Secret Service agents approached him unsolicited (highly dubious) and said this was the case. He then said he researched it and found that all ambassadors are afforded some Secret Service protection and that Bandar has more than others. I haven't seen the film, but I highly doubt that part made it in. I'm seeing it tonight, and if it does I will offer a full retraction to that statement right here.

The second point was about Sen. McDermott's trip to Iraq that was funded by a charity that is funded by a man who had a lot of business dealings with Saddam, and that presents an conflict of interests. Apparently Sen. McDermott plays a role in Moore's film. Instead of answering this point, Moore completely deflected it and moved to the 'smear job' defense. Nevermind the fact that his film, once again I haven't seen it in its entirety but I have a feeling, is a total smear job on Bush, he still didn't respond to the accusation.

After that it degenerated into a love-fest between Stern and Moore and when Howard said something like "'Bandar Bush' has an overwhelmingly larger amount of Secret Service protection, provided by the President, than any other ambassador"; a claim that is completely unsubstantiated but presented as truth, I changed the station.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-25-04 @ 3:27 PM

curtoid

06-25-2004, 11:37 AM

Moore CAN spin with his footage (And does constantly)...

That's what he's supposed to do to tell the story; he has a narrative he's trying to tell, and he will tell it the best way he can.

If, during the investigation of the movie, he stumbled on something that changed his mind, then he would have changed that, or acknoweldged that. At least with him (like you said) you know from where he's shooting.

I would hazard a guess that he entered making "Bowling for Columbine" a straight-up anti gun piece, but, after working on it, wound up making a more compelling argument about the media and it's roll in shaping fear in this country.

I actually didn't see "Columbine" when it was out (even though I had been a big fan of his) because I was furious with his behavior in the 2000 elections in getting Bush elected by supporting Nader. I felt, like many of the Republicans calling in to Talk Radio today do, that he was really only interested in his wallet - under Clinton, he made one movie (I believe) - he had nothing to bitch about - so why not get a Republican in there and give him (Moore) a voice again.

Now, under Bush, he has finally won an Oscar, and he stands today to become the wealthiest non fiction filmmaker ever. Yeah, I can see why the right would be upset, or at least I have my own understanding of that argument, even if their hubris is coming at it from very different motivation.

Then, the cynic in me would point that he has since apologized to Al Gore for voting and supporting Ralph, and has made it his mission to get GWB out of office. Guilt, perhaps?

If I have a real problem with Moore as a filmmaker, it's that he tries to do too much with his topics, and often times can't (because of time) really spend the time fleshing some of the better points through. He's going for the really, really big picture, when at times it might be better to have a more myopic view for the narrative - but, to his credit these ARE big issues, and no one else is even talking about it.

In any event, I have forgiven MM and really look forward to seeing this film for myself.

http://img21.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/44.jpg

"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB

This message was edited by curtoid on 6-25-04 @ 3:40 PM

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 11:40 AM

That's what he's supposed to do to tell the story; he has a narrative he's trying to tell, and he will tell it the best way he can

By 'narrative', do you mean story? If that's the case, he should say that and not try to pass it off as the truth.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

mikeyboy

06-25-2004, 11:48 AM

By 'narrative', do you mean story? If that's the case, he should say that and not try to pass it off as the truth.

A story isn't, by definition, necessarily fiction.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=mikeyboy">
Ron & Fez Show Log (http://www.osirusonline.com/ronfez.htm)

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 11:50 AM

Yeah, but Moore doesn't have a problem swerving into fiction if it serves the 'narrative'. That's been proven over and over and over again. A true documentarian changes the story to serve the truth, not the other way around.

I don't care what Michael Moore says. Anyone can have any opinion and say whatever he wants to back it up. Michael Moore tries to say his opinion is immutable truth, and there are too many people that either back him up or think what he's saying is true.
<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-25-04 @ 3:54 PM

Doomstone

06-25-2004, 11:56 AM

http://www.suntimes.com/output/eb-feature/cst-ftr-moore18.html

'9/11': Just the facts?

June 18, 2004

BY ROGER EBERT FILM CRITIC

A reader writes:

"In your articles discussing Michael Moore's film 'Fahrenheit 9/11,' you call it a documentary. I always thought of documentaries as presenting facts objectively without editorializing. While I have enjoyed many of Mr. Moore's films, I don't think they fit the definition of a documentary."

That's where you're wrong. Most documentaries, especially the best ones, have an opinion and argue for it. Even those that pretend to be objective reflect the filmmaker's point of view. Moviegoers should observe the bias, take it into account and decide if the film supports it or not.

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

LiquidCourage

06-25-2004, 12:00 PM

I am a big fan of Michael Moores work. I think it acomplishes alot and a lot of times I agree with what hes saying. I thought his last film was great. Hes got balls to do what he does.

<img src=http://img18.photobucket.com/albums/v53/monster6sixty6/guests/cash_sig.jpg>
Big thanks to Monsterone.

90% of his last movie was a load of crap. How is making movies that are full of shit "having balls"?

Doomstone

06-25-2004, 12:01 PM

90%? Got a source on that one?

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

blakjeezis

06-25-2004, 12:19 PM

Most documentaries, especially the best ones, have an opinion and argue for it. Even those that pretend to be objective reflect the filmmaker's point of view. Moviegoers should observe the bias, take it into account and decide if the film supports it or not.

Ok good, so you, me and Rogert Ebert are in agreement, what Michael Moore puts on the screen are misrepresentations to serve his political agenda.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

LiquidCourage

06-25-2004, 12:26 PM

Oh come on. Bowling for Columbine was so cut and pasted it was unbelievable. The famous bank scene was a complete fabrication.

Doomstone

06-25-2004, 12:28 PM

Ok good, so you, me and Rogert Ebert are in agreement, what Michael Moore puts on the screen are misrepresentations to serve his political agenda.

On occasion. But I also find it hilarious to see all these accusations of lies and misrepentation about a movie, from people who haven't even seen the movie. Or, then there's the people who need to lie in order to accuse Moore of lying. Nobody here that I know of, of course. People like Michael Isikoff:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5287890/

[quote]
LEHANE: Yes. And I have great respect for Michael. He is a wonderful reporter.

But I think, if you carefully look at the words that were employed and the facts that are employed in this movie on that particular portion that he is talking about, you will find that it`s very, very hard to question it. First of all, we do not say that flights took off when federal airspace was closed.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: Viewers don`t look at a transcript, though, Chris. You know that. They are left with an impression by looking at images.

LEHANE: Yes, but we are very, very careful. We make very clear that the flights didn`t take off until after September 13, which is when federal airspace was opened.

And the Saudis that Michael is talking about, there were 140 Saudis on those flights, 142. Only 30 of them were interviewed in a way that was completely inconsistent with usual FBI and Justice Department protocol. In fact, even in the 9/11 Commission report that Michael is referring to, it raises some issues about the length of those interviews and the fact that the vast majority of folks who left the country after this terrible tragedy were not interviewed.

There`s an FBI agent in the movie who personally talks about the fact that this was not consistent with the practices that should have been employed.

(CROSSTALK)

SCARBOROUGH: OK, Chris.

Michael, respond.

ISIKOFF: Well, Joe, I think the point you were saying, that the clear impression of the movie is a little different than some of the particular words that sort of slip by very quickly.

For instance, an example, Chris says that they never say that it was when federal airspace was shut down. They say it happened after September 13. But it doesn`t say in the movie, at least not in any transcript I have seen or what I heard when I saw the movie, that that`s when federal airspace was reopened.

LEHANE: But that`s not what you wrote in your piece, Michael.

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: In the piece that you wrote in "Newsweek," you specifically said that Michael Moore`s movie stated that flights left while federal airspace was closed. The movie does not state that. Your piece was wrong on that.

(CROSSTALK)

ISIKOFF: Does the movie say that it-explicitly say that when federal airspace was reopened? Does it say that?

LEHANE: Did your story specifically state that the movie did state that? Is that what your story said?

(CROSSTALK)

LEHANE: This is important, because you wrote this specifically in your piece. And, as I said, you`re an awesome reporter, but you had that one wrong.

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

JerryTaker

06-25-2004, 12:39 PM

90%? Got a source on that one?

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/portraits.Par.0028.PortraitImageFile.gif

 
Sig Pending...

TheMojoPin

06-25-2004, 01:17 PM

I would hazard a guess that he entered making "Bowling for Columbine" a straight-up anti gun piece, but, after working on it, wound up making a more compelling argument about the media and it's roll in shaping fear in this country.

I'd say it was reversed. I've been on his mailing list for years, and his description of what would become "Bowling" was that it was an analysis of the question of, "why are Americans so violent?" From there he was going to investigate sub-sections like our gun violence compared to other "civilized" nations (Europe, Japan, etc.) and whether or not the media and pop culture influences our violent tendencies, especially with children.

But somewhere between those initial ideas and what ended up on screen, it did seem to mutat into, what I at least took it as, a "straight up anti-gun piece." He narrowed his focus, went on the warpath, and I think the film suffered tremendously because of it.

The famous bank scene was a complete fabrication.

No, it wasn't. As much as I criticize this film, I encounter this segment more than any other as "proof" he's a "liar," and it's one of the worst choices to prove that kind of thinking. I know the details, I know what he "stretched"...but it is NOT a fabrication. It's an exagerration.

Yes, he implied that signing up for an account gets you a gun from, the bank right then and there, glossing over that it was actually usually at least a week before this happened, after an initial background check was done.

Don't think I'm trying to get him off the hook here...he "bent" the truth about as far as it will go. But his ultimate point, that this was a bank that gives out guns for signing up for a financing account, still stands.

It's shady, but it doesn't make him a "liar."

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

NewYorkDragons80

06-25-2004, 04:49 PM

But I also find it hilarious to see all these accusations of lies and misrepentation about a movie, from people who haven't even seen the movie.
Then I would assume that you regularly watch Hannity and O'Reilly lest you label them as liars without having witnessed the "lies" yourself.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

Doomstone

06-25-2004, 05:43 PM

http://home.socal.rr.com/gbaker/troll.jpg

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

CaptClown

06-25-2004, 05:47 PM

Are you following me around Doomstone? That looks like the chick that is trying to push up on me.

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
Poison Clan rocks the world

TheMojoPin

06-25-2004, 08:22 PM

Then I would assume that you regularly watch Hannity and O'Reilly lest you label them as liars without having witnessed the "lies" yourself.

I watch at least an hour of Fox News a day, and am usually (and sadly) trapped hearing O'Reilly's or Rush's or Hannity's radio show a good 3-4 times a week.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 6-26-04 @ 12:22 AM

NewYorkDragons80

06-26-2004, 06:25 AM

The famous bank scene was a complete fabrication.

No, it wasn't. As much as I criticize this film, I encounter this segment more than any other as "proof" he's a "liar," and it's one of the worst choices to prove that kind of thinking. I know the details, I know what he "stretched"...but it is NOT a fabrication. It's an exagerration.

Yes, he implied that signing up for an account gets you a gun from, the bank right then and there, glossing over that it was actually usually at least a week before this happened, after an initial background check was done.
Plus, when you think about it, you couldn't use the gun to rob a bank because they just got every shred of information about you.

In my opinion, the most blatantly awful lie he told was that the NRA was founded by the Klan. You can accuse the right of lying all you want, but I can't recall a time when a conservative pundit invented such a false claim. Most liberals who make claims like "Cheney met with the Taliban in August 2001," strike me as people who genuinely believe in their source and trust its veracity. However, if Moore did enough research to find the history of the KKK and the NRA, then he certainly would have found that the NRA's founders were the most notorious anti-Klansmen of the time. Moore is the kind of person who is so assured of his moral superiority over the NRA that he can justify lying about them in his own mind.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

LiquidCourage

06-26-2004, 07:39 AM

Ah yes, NYD. What miniscule details the left wing lets their heroes overlook. He tries to make all these NRA-KKK ties, when in fact the NRA was founded by former Union officers (you know, the guys who fought AGAINST the slave owners).

He paints the NRA as a bunch of racists, and when he sits down and talks with Charlton Heston (the head of the NRA, and thus the head and biggest racist of them all) he leaves out little details like how Heston marched on Washington DC with Martin Luther King Jr. the day he made his famous "I have a dream" speech.

But I guess things like protesting with MLK don't matter much, when you just absolutely worship at the feet of black people and make stupid statements like how Sept. 11th was caused by "not enough black men being on the hijacked planes."

LiquidCourage

06-26-2004, 07:45 AM

The famous bank scene was a complete fabrication.

No, it wasn't. As much as I criticize this film, I encounter this segment more than any other as "proof" he's a "liar," and it's one of the worst choices to prove that kind of thinking. I know the details, I know what he "stretched"...but it is NOT a fabrication. It's an exagerration.

Yes, he implied that signing up for an account gets you a gun from, the bank right then and there, glossing over that it was actually usually at least a week before this happened, after an initial background check was done.

Don't think I'm trying to get him off the hook here...he "bent" the truth about as far as it will go. But his ultimate point, that this was a bank that gives out guns for signing up for a financing account, still stands.

It's shady, but it doesn't make him a "liar."

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

I just cite the bank scene because it's one of the things about BFC I always hear people talking about. "Did you see BFC? He walks right into a bank and they just hand him a gun!"

There's a lot better things to cite as his bullshit lies, but it's more of the twisting of facts and things like that, rather than actually staging scenes things like that.

But anyway, just about every scene in that movie has some sort of bank-scene twist on it, and yet it's sighted as the Bible when it comes to the gun control debate.

Then this guy has the balls to get up onstage at the Oscars and call Bush's presidency "fictitious", when the movie he just won an Oscar for is as close to fiction as you can get.

Shecky

06-26-2004, 08:28 AM

In my opinion, the most blatantly awful lie he told was that the NRA was founded by the Klan.

He just stated that the KKK and the NRA were started in the same year.

TheMojoPin

06-26-2004, 08:37 AM

What miniscule details the left wing lets their heroes overlook.

Just stop it.

Nobody here has said he's always correct, and in fact, most of us "lefties" here have gone out of our way to point out how much more skews his films, so cut the shit. Nobody on "the left" nominated Moore to anything, and the only thing he's a spokesperson for is himself. He doesn't "represent" or speak for the left....that's a lazy generalization of people opposing him. As a liberal, I have ZERO obligation to oppose or support Michael Moore. The man does his own thing, and I don't have to give shits about him if I don't want to, so quit trying to prop him up like he somehow represents me and my "kind."

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Doctor Manhattan

06-26-2004, 09:14 AM

I think as long as Moore is getting more information out there, even it it's from his viewpoint, it's a good thing. The Media doesn't show a lot of stuff that we NEED to see and use to make up our own minds.

I'm still not totally understanding how this movie is hurting the war against terrorism (aside from people not signing up for the military, but that was on the decline way before Moore made this film)

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/oldmanstarwars.jpg" border=0></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 6-26-04 @ 1:14 PM

keithy_19

06-26-2004, 09:45 AM

I watched the documentary 'Uncle Saddam' this week. Now that's a documentary!

http://www.silentpix.com/modules/Coppermine/albums/userpics/ducksig.jpg
<a href="http://keithy19.blogspot.com/" target=_new>My Blog</a>

TheMojoPin

06-26-2004, 09:58 AM

I'm still not totally understanding how this movie is hurting the war against terrorism (aside from people not signing up for the military, but that was on the decline way before Moore made this film)

The go-to "anti-American" crap is what gets me. What, nobody in the history of this country has ever criticized the government? Aren't we FOUNDED on that fucking notion?!?

If he's wrong, he's wrong. But how the fuck is somebody "anti-American" if they really hate the current administration? You can't oppose Bush and still be American?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Duke

06-26-2004, 10:06 AM

i saw farienght Fahrenheit 9/11 last night awesome movie....Michael Moore is a great director and producer

http://img30.photobucket.com/albums/v91/SatCam/dukesig.jpg

Duke

06-26-2004, 10:08 AM

NewYorkDragons80

06-26-2004, 10:18 AM

He just stated that the KKK and the NRA were started in the same year.
That's another thing I hate about him. The films he makes not only introduce ideas, but endorse them. Then, when those ideas are debunked, he simply says, "I let the audience draw its own conclusions." The problem is, he doesn't. In the cartoon, he has a Klansman shaking the hand of an NRA founder. He coyly throws in a devil's advocate character saying (paraphrasing) "I'm sure the two had nothing to do with each other," but there is a clear statement made by the filmmaker that the Klan and the NRA are one and the same. I am still baffled as to why the NRA didn't file a lawsuit.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

TheMojoPin

06-26-2004, 10:53 AM

Because there was no basis for one since he did just what you said. Technically, there is no connection between the NRA and the KKK, and he didn't make one. I took it as him saying was there were just as bad as each other...but not actually connected.

Personally, I thought it was asinine, but I never saw it as him actually even coming close to "proving" a link between the two.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Doctor Manhattan

06-26-2004, 02:03 PM

Democrats dont hate america even though they dont like the Bush adminstartion...

The Reagan Family doesn't like the Bush administration. I'm pretty sure the Reagans like America and I know Republicans love the Reagans!

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/oldmanstarwars.jpg" border=0></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 6-26-04 @ 6:04 PM

curtoid

06-27-2004, 03:44 PM

I would hazard a guess that he entered making "Bowling for Columbine" a straight-up anti gun piece, but, after working on it, wound up making a more compelling argument about the media and it's roll in shaping fear in this country.

I felt I was stuck in some sort of cosmic center of the universe thing this weekend - framing my own viewing of "9/11" I met talked with two very different people who both told me, when the topic of Moore came up, that they had worked with him a different times of his career.

The first one, who I talked with hours before seeing the film, worked with him in Michigan when he was writing and editing for the newspaper there. She working in the media too, so they encountered each other a lot.

Her experience and perception of him was quite favorable - she described that he comes by being a "progressive" naturally; that he has always been driven to work towards helping those that can't speak up for themselves. She, herself, is a professional woman - a wife a mother - and yes, she definately leans way to the left (the give away should be when she used the word "progressive! ha!)

Then Saturday night, a day after have seen the film, I'm at a party, and making small talk with someone who I share a mutual friend with. Turns out this guy works for FOX News as an editor, and at one time he claims he quit a job working for Michael Moore because he didn't like the deceptive editing decisions Moore was making; he went further to say that Moore was only "after the money."

Neither really changed my opinion about Moore or about the film, but it was interesting to have the opportunity to talk with differing people who both had worked with him - kind of one of those "only in DC" moments or two, like on a retarded episode of "Murphy Brown."

The "progressive" woman is actually a client, so my discussions and opinions exchanged with her should only go so far - I did mention how I was happy to see him supporting the Democrats this election year. The FOX guy was pretty nice, but when the topic did go to politics, he got kind of intense, and went out of his way to defend the networkfor being "balanced," and even told me a story about Brit Hume killing a story because it was too biased against the left.

Uh-huh.

I then told him my Brit Hume story - which I will save for another day on here (maybe after I tell that Jody Foster story).

The film: I thought it was fantastic, that simple. The way he laid the case out - fact after fact after fact - supported by video of the people in question and their detractors.

Yes, with regards to the Saudi connection, he comes to his own conclusion - because he has to! He presents the information, much like Bush did with going to Iraq, and then makes the leap, which makes as much sense as anything else, since pretty much up until now, we haven't been allowed to talk about, much less get answers to.

The media not only gave Bush a pass on his connect the dots reasoning for going to war, they helped sell it. Something they forget today when holding Moore's feet to the fire "for doing the very thing he accuses the President of."

The movie lays it all out, and more often than answers all the questions, it wonders what the hell is going on.

* The whole intro to the film, setting up life before 9/11 happened, was appropriately surreal. The first tinge of "oh god" was when we saw clips of Bush and Bush in Florida on September 10th; whenever I see clips from right before the shit hit the fan, I can't help by get some "creepers," if ya know what I mean.

* The handling of the attack itself was terrific. No shots of the towers - just black screen as the first plane hits. Then the audio of the second plane hits, and the camera then shifts to people looking on. We don't see people jumping, but we know the people we are looking at are seeing it. Handled with so much class, this sequence.

* The scenes of Bush in the school were also effective, although I would have preffered not to have had Moore's editorizing over it. That aside, though, I co

newport king

06-27-2004, 09:11 PM

maybe after I tell that Jody Foster story

as long as it ends with you and a couple of friends getting her on a pinball machine i'm all ears.

<img src="http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/newportking.jpg">

NewYorkDragons80

06-28-2004, 08:38 AM

The Reagan Family doesn't like the Bush administration.
Well, little Ronnie doesn't. Nancy disagrees with the President's stance on stem cell research. That's more like it.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

NewYorkDragons80

06-28-2004, 08:43 AM

Yes, with regards to the Saudi connection, he comes to his own conclusion - because he has to! He presents the information, much like Bush did with going to Iraq, and then makes the leap, which makes as much sense as anything else, since pretty much up until now, we haven't been allowed to talk about, much less get answers to.
Who stopped us from talking about it? This forum alone probably has a thousand discussions about Iraq

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 6-28-04 @ 12:44 PM

Doctor Manhattan

06-28-2004, 09:11 AM

Well, little Ronnie doesn't. Nancy disagrees with the President's stance on stem cell research. That's more like it.

Well, Ronald Reagan didn't come out and call them a bunch of douchebags but I think it was more than Ron Jr. not being fond of them.

I was referring to the original George HW bush Adminstration since Ronald wasn't really in a state of mind to worry about George W Bush

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

blakjeezis

06-28-2004, 10:36 AM

I saw the movie on Friday night, and have been mulling it over since then. I am now prepared to give my review (I know you've all been waiting with bated breath). Moore's arguments, if you can call them that, are pure conjecture and backed up with very little evidence. He also contradicts himself constantly and has very little regard for facts, or any type of objective presentation. Before anyone gives me the `it's not supposed to be objective', I know that, but my concern is that others don't and take what he presents as truth. Consequently, I'm not reviewing the film in defense of Bush or as what it really is, an agenda filled work of propaganda. I'm trying to look at the film as I fear a lot of people are, as an objective academic work, critiqued from that perspective

- The only noteworthy section of the film is the part dealing with the relationship between the Bush family, the Saudi Royals and the bin-Ladens. I'll preface this by saying that this is Michael Moore talking, and he has been known to play `fast and loose' with the facts. As such, anything presented will be done so without much regard for small details like the truth and will be skewed to show the Bush family in the worst possible light, and that must be remembered when viewing this part of the film. Nevertheless, there is definitely a relationship between the respective families. And while this is disturbing, insidious, and raises a number of ethical questions, it is much less than the great revelation Moore wants it to be. The ideas that powerful, wealthy, and politically influential families, especially ones from nations that have strong economic ties like the US and SA, would have relationships, and that those relationships would breed favoritism in regards to government dealings, contracts, etc, are hardly new. In fact, I would say that they are as old as government itself. That does not, however, excuse them. The problem that stems from Michael Moore's version of their dealings is that it's Michael Moore's version of their dealings, completely subjective and skewed through the prism of his agenda. He tries to make too much of it, even going as far as implying that Osama isn't as rejected by his family as we are lead to believe. I know of someone who is the `black sheep' of a family of considerable wealth, and he isn't hiding in caves in another country. He still feeds from the proverbial teat. If Osama enjoyed any standing whatsoever with his family, he would be conducting operations from a palace or a mansion somewhere and enjoying relative comfort and safety. However, the accusation of corruption still has validity and is certainly worth further investigation.

- On to the conjecture. A small example: The scene of Bush reading with the children. Remaining in his seat after hearing the news of the 2 planes hitting the Towers. The famous 7 minutes. Moore's conclusion is that Bush stayed because he didn't know what to do and didn't have anyone telling him what to do. I guess you can make that assumption. Since there's no evidence to support any conclusion, we can make any assumption we like. I prefer to think that Bush stayed there because he was temporarily crazy glued to the seat. Moore plays up the stupidity angle through some creative editing. By showing the footage of the President in slow motion, it certainly gives the effect that he is dull, dim-witted, and confused. Couple that with Moore's voice-over and the effect is complete. Of course, like Christopher Hitchens said, had Bush leaped to his feet and immediately gone into war mode, Moore would be accusing him of being a bloodthirsty maniac, who had little regard for the potential trauma that could be wrought upon the children by the horrific goings-on. That's what I assume anyway, but since any assumption we make is true, I think it's valid.

- Disregard for facts. The scene with Badar Bush's Secret Service agent. It pretty much runs exactly as I thought it would. The exchange between Moore and the guard is suspect (kinda comes off as bad acting, but I'm assuming agai

TheMojoPin

06-28-2004, 12:15 PM

Disrespect for our troops.

Nothing in that footage showed them doing anything remotely abusive to that family.

So which is it?

Does Michael Moore come out and say, "look at the awful things these troops are doing to this family?"

Or did you just not like what you saw?

Sometimes a filmmaker CAN just show something and it's up to the audience to decide what it means to them.

Other than that, I agree with everything else in your post.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Tall_James

06-28-2004, 12:23 PM

I lost all respect for him after "Canadian Bacon".

<img src=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/patton.jpg>
Avoiding household responsibilites...one post at a time
[center]The Best Blog You're Not Reading (http://cheeseeatingbird.blogspot.com)

JerryTaker

06-28-2004, 12:37 PM

I know of someone who is the ‹¨«black sheep‹¨« of a family of considerable wealth, and he isn‹¨«t hiding in caves in another country.

Just chiming in to mention that this is one of the biggest media -induced fallicies we're supposed to take as fact.

I'm sorry, but if a man on dialysis, such as osama is, had to "hide in a cave" for this long, he'd be long dead by now.

 
Sig Pending...

Tall_James

06-28-2004, 12:48 PM

I'm sorry, but if a man on dialysis, such as osama is, had to "hide in a cave" for this long, he'd be long dead by now.

Not if he was in the Batcave. They've got everything down there.

<img src=http://www.seanenright.com/declan/batman/batcave.jpg>

<img src=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/patton.jpg>
Avoiding household responsibilites...one post at a time
[center]The Best Blog You're Not Reading (http://cheeseeatingbird.blogspot.com)

The Blowhard

06-28-2004, 12:51 PM

Wow, I never knew that this movie would be so polarizing. This is almost as bad as "Red Dawn", when I sat on my porch with a rifle waiting for a Russian to parachute into my yard.
It's all about free speech people. I'm not a fan of Moore's but he does have the right to be a horse's ass. Our right to free speech is under attack, so target your aggression on people like John Ashcroft.

saveopieanthony.net

06-28-2004, 01:33 PM

do we really need a mother crying about the son that got killed in iraqi for a half hour? i mean seriously...the beginning 40 minutes was good...but listening to a mother cry about her lost son for 35 minutes (watching her with her family, at the employment agency she works to get poor people jobs, visiting Washington DC for work and dealing with someone confronting her about bush) is a little too much. It's like he ran out of material...

Big Ass Card Holder 1230 (whoo--aaah)

"Ronnie...this guy Hank said "I'm going to kill you Fat girl" - Fez
"Really...that means he must know you" - Ron

Iamnotatool

06-28-2004, 01:40 PM

Allow me to pontificate for a moment if you will.

Moore is an asshole. Evidently he is exactly the dick he claims others are with his employees, making them work rediculous hours and taking credit for all their findings as his own. He's an uber-wealthy man, which he has every right to be, but it has also turned him into an asshole. It's hard to be "abou the people" or "for the people" when your financial status is "Way the fuck above the people."

Bush is an asshole. Lied about WMD. Lies about 9-11. Lies about ties to the Bin Laden family. Lies about tons of other stuff to I'm sure.

That being said, the movie makes a lot of good points. It also obviously lays it on thick in some areas. It's up to adults to see it and decide for themselves what they want to believe.

I can't fucking believe I agree with Mojo.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/iamnotatool.gif>
Please don't hold my huge nutbag against me, or I'll hold it against you that you have flapjack tits

blakjeezis

06-28-2004, 03:25 PM

It's like he ran out of material

I thought that when he showed 10 minutes of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Wolfowitz, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld being prepped tor TV. Just shots of them getting ready: makeup, hair, etc. and the bit with Ashcroft singing. I saw no reason for those parts other than to pad out the film and to make the administration look foolish. What possible, meaningful point is there to be made by showing Paul Wolfowitz spit-combing his hair, besides trying to make him look like a buffoon?

And Mojo, as far as the scene of the house raid is concerned I'm admittedly making a leap there myself. Since he had shown quite a few interviews with soldiers talking about killing Iraqis and so on and shots of them mistreating the prisoners, it is my assumption that he was trying to portray the soldiers strongarming that family. If he is indeed, like you suggest, leaving it up to the viewers to make their own call on what was going on, then that is the call I'm making.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-28-04 @ 7:26 PM

The Blowhard

06-28-2004, 06:00 PM

White people scare the crap out of me. . I have never been attacked by a black person, never been evicted by a black person, never had my security deposit ripped off by a black landlord, never had a black landlord . never been pulled over by a black cop, never been sold a lemon by a black car salesman, never seen a black car salesman, never had a black person deny me a bank loan, never had a black person bury my movie, and I've never heard a black person say, 'We're going to eliminate ten thousand jobs here - have a nice day!'
Michael Moore
Stupid White Men.

He's disturbed.

TheMojoPin

06-28-2004, 06:15 PM

Actually, that might be the only 100% sane thing he's ever said.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

NewYorkDragons80

06-28-2004, 06:34 PM

Actually, that might be the only 100% sane thing he's ever said.
My problem with Moore when he comments on white people and black people is that he seems to be a self-hating white man. For him, blacks are innocent until proven guilty, while whites are guilty until proven innocent. I have serious issues with someone who goes out of his way to overpraise an ethnicity of which he is not a member while using the same zeal to disparage the ethnicity of which he is a member.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

TheMojoPin

06-28-2004, 06:50 PM

I think it's more accurate to say he thinks "RICH white = automatically guilty."

But other than that, you're right A generalization like that is stupid ANY way, positive or negative (Someone is always guilty/non-guilty, etc.).

I just think the statement Heckler quoted is kinda apt, because it's right. Statistically speaking, I have FAR more reasons to "fear" (Or at least be wary of) my fellow white man than any other race, at least in terms of negative things that can happen to me on a daily basis because of something somebody else is "doing" to me.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 6-28-04 @ 11:24 PM

Doctor Manhattan

06-29-2004, 05:55 AM

I think the best example of the extreme right wing thinking was Britany Spears' comment in the film

Not an exact quote, but I think I got her point correct

...we should all just support Bush in any decision he makes...

That type of thinking is scary. And W isn't much smarter than she is. We should support the president in general, but if he makes bad choices we have to step in. The same goes for anyone in power in a free society.

Moore made a film that is biased. Fine. You can even say he's a liar, sure. But W has been proven as a liar and he has sent young people to die for a reason the gave us. Moore's goal is to entertain, make money and help remove this idiot from the office.

Most of the people actively trying to stop people from seeing Moore's film (just that alone is scary) haven't seen the film (adds to the scare factor) What the fuck is that about? Let me see the stupid film and decide for myself.

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 6-29-04 @ 9:57 AM

East Side Dave

06-29-2004, 09:27 AM

Just saw the movie and I liked it! Heck, what do I know! I just knows what I likes, yessir! That's why they call me "Three Time Likey Champion!", yessir!

<img src=http://www.richstillwell.com/ESD.gif>
Big Ass Mafia

Click this link (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/thenight/ppr/index.shtml) to hear my show on Jersey's 90.5 The Night FM; (weeknights)-
Sunday night/Monday morning through Thursday night/Friday morning- 3 to 5 AM.

LiquidCourage

06-29-2004, 02:18 PM

This whole "Let's make fun of white people even though we're rich white suburban types" is getting so old. Enough of it already. I bet Michael Moore clutches his wallet to make sure it's still there every time he sees a black guy 200 yards down the road.

Tazz

06-29-2004, 07:00 PM

Ok, I just downloaded and watched this "movie" (like I'd ever give that douche my money).

The parts in the middle about the true horrors of war was something people need to see. The first hour featuring the Saudi's was pointless. Who really cares? The Saudi government didn't attack us, a few crazy people from that country did.

The whole last 20 minutes attacking corporate America was just sad. That fat prick is making money hand over fist. Why can't others?

<img src=http://tazz1376.homestead.com/files/homersig.gif>

TheMojoPin

06-29-2004, 08:18 PM

The whole last 20 minutes attacking corporate America was just sad. That fat prick is making money hand over fist. Why can't others?

Is he making his money the same way? Does his making money effect other people they way their making money does? Is it really the same? Did Michael Moore ever say people can't make money?

And does anyone actually know how much Micahel Moore "makes?" Or is worth? In the past he usually sank most of the money he made off of one project into his next project.

I bet Michael Moore clutches his wallet to make sure it's still there every time he sees a black guy 200 yards down the road.

What the fuck does that have to do with ANYTHING?!?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

curtoid

06-30-2004, 05:38 AM

If Michael Moore had gone out of his way and bent over backwards to present all sides to this story, and put his own passion and opinions aside (why he has to do that while Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity get to have their opinions is beyond me), but let's just assume that he went in there and gave equal time to all of the issues and laid it all out there in a way that didn't tip his hand one bit, about what he was thinking, the right would STILL be crying and moaning about it, saying he was hiding something and trying to be sneaky with his opinions.

The hypocrites would have even had the balls to say, "Well I would have respected him more if he had just stuck to his opinion."

http://img21.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/44.jpg

"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB

Doctor Manhattan

06-30-2004, 05:44 AM

Who really cares? The Saudi government didn't attack us, a few crazy people from that country did.

That is true. Iraq also did not attack us, I don't think any of the crazy people who did were from Iraq.

The point of the movie is Iraq didn't attack us, but for some reason we attacked them. That reason has become to liberate them. We were lied to about the fact that they could launch a massive attack on us.

Saudi Arabia probably funds a lot of this terrorism, it may not be done on the government level, but there is a lot more reason to attack the Saudis than the Iraquis. But that country has more invested in the USA than Iraq.

So a lot of people do care.

That fat prick is making money hand over fist. Why can't others?

Can they make money without sacrificing other people's lives? That fat prick hasn't sent anyone to their death by lieing to them. He thinks that soldiers shouldn't be used like they have been. If Iraq actually had WMDs I'd personnally tell Micheal Moore to go fuck himself to his fat face and shave his beard, but they don't. And our soldiers are dying. They don't deserve to be lied to. We don't deserve it. We need to respect our armed forces more than this.

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 6-30-04 @ 9:49 AM

Doctor Manhattan

06-30-2004, 05:51 AM

If Michael Moore had gone out of his way and bent over backwards to present all sides to this story, and put his own passion and opinions aside...

And would they really want him making their side? I would think they'd rather do it themselves.

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

Tazz

06-30-2004, 05:52 AM

It was also pretty absurd of him to imply that the war against Afghanistan was about money.

<img src=http://tazz1376.homestead.com/files/homersig.gif>

blakjeezis

06-30-2004, 08:48 AM

(why he has to do that while Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity get to have their opinions is beyond me),

Easy there, Mr. Kettle. The left hold O'Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh to the same standards the right hold Moore, and point out the same flaws. To suggest that no one calls them on their bullshit is ludicrous and patently untrue. And there are plenty of righties who apply a liberal helping of salt (get it? liberal) to those pundits' comments as well. Just like Mojo, quite correctly, points out a lot of lefties do with Moore's pablum.

The problem is too many people don't hold both sides to equal standards. There's way too much 'hometeam' support. People should take of their lefty/righty rose glasses and look at things objectively.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 6-30-04 @ 1:19 PM

Doctor Manhattan

06-30-2004, 09:40 AM

It was also pretty absurd of him to imply that the war against Afghanistan was about money.

I think I need to watch the film again. I thought Moore said the invasion of Afganistan was nessessary because the Taiban attacked us and that's where they were. He also said Bush didn't send a proper force to quickly capture Osama.

An attack on Iraq at that point (1 month after 9/11) wouldn't make much sense

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

TheMojoPin

06-30-2004, 09:42 AM

I saw we just toss ALL the pundits out the window.

They distract the public from real issues by BECOMING the issues themselves.

Fuck them and their self-serving asses. Right or left, all they want to do is make our opinions for us.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Furtherman

06-30-2004, 09:44 AM

An attack on Iraq at that point (1 month after 9/11) wouldn't make much sense

An attack on Iraq at ANY point doesn't make much sense.

US Lap Top Bag Laundry Instructions (http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0406/S00263.htm)

<IMG SRC="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=7">
...with thanks to JustJon

NewYorkDragons80

06-30-2004, 11:31 AM

That is true. Iraq also did not attack us, I don't think any of the crazy people who did were from Iraq.
http://archive.abcnews.go.com/media/us/images/apr_youseff_terror_n.jpg
Crazy, from Iraq, and an assailant on the US.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

NewYorkDragons80

06-30-2004, 11:35 AM

It was also pretty absurd of him to imply that the war against Afghanistan was about money.
No more absurd than saying kids shoot other kids because of Dick Clark. Hitchens's articles are full of hyperbole, but he is correct in saying that Moore goes through his points lightning quick without giving the audience a chance to analyze the connections he is making.

I've always found the pipeline argument to be a strange one. Espescially since it hasn't been built. I shouldn't be commenting, though, because I haven't seen the movie.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 6-30-04 @ 3:37 PM

East Side Dave

06-30-2004, 11:51 AM

I heard today that the third biggest Mexican population in America is in Colorado!! Colorado!! What the shit?! Someone should make a documentary on that shit!!

<img src=http://www.richstillwell.com/ESD.gif>
Big Ass Mafia

Click this link (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/thenight/ppr/index.shtml) to hear my show on Jersey's 90.5 The Night FM; (weeknights)-
Sunday night/Monday morning through Thursday night/Friday morning- 3 to 5 AM.

keithy_19

06-30-2004, 12:04 PM

South Park should do an episode entitled, "When spics take over South Park".

http://www.silentpix.com/modules/Coppermine/albums/userpics/ducksig.jpg
<a href="http://keith_r.blogspot.com/" target=_new>My Blog</a>

LiquidCourage

06-30-2004, 02:25 PM

I heard today that the third biggest Mexican population in America is in Colorado!! Colorado!! What the shit?! Someone should make a documentary on that shit!!

That shouldn't be much of a surprise. THe word Colorado is Spanish, after all.

Doctor Manhattan

06-30-2004, 03:51 PM

Crazy, from Iraq, and an assailant on the US.

That's one. Fifteen of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudis. So that one Iraqi must have been REALLY crazy.

An attack on Iraq at ANY point doesn't make much sense.

Exactly. But even the Bush 43 administration couldn't push it that far back in 2001, they needed time to scare us into going for the war in 2003.

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

NewYorkDragons80

06-30-2004, 04:06 PM

That's one. Fifteen of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudis. So that one Iraqi must have been REALLY crazy.
So you propose we invade Saudi Arabia?

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

Doctor Manhattan

06-30-2004, 04:25 PM

I'm not saying we invade any country, but if we were going to invade any country which one makes more sense?

<a href="http://members.cox.net/cousinken/itsabouttime.mp3"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 6-30-04 @ 8:27 PM

Snoogans

06-30-2004, 04:28 PM

mexico

http://academ.hvcc.edu/~01885716/images/s_sig.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAUX!!!!!
Rollin down the Street, Smokin Endo, sippin on Gin & Juice Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

kc7586

06-30-2004, 04:51 PM

Michael Moore is a communist. end of story.

<marquee>I am woman hear me roar, bitch, and whine.</marquee>
<center>
<IMG SRC="http://publish.hometown.aol.com/vampchick7586/myhomepage/murdersig.gif?">
</center>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>Vampire girls suck....</marquee>
Good girls are bad girls that dont get caught.
Life's a bitch.....then you strangle one.

curtoid

06-30-2004, 07:28 PM

Easy there, Mr. Kettle. The left hold O'Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh to the same standards the right hold Moore, and point out the same flaws. To suggest that no one calls them on their bullshit is ludicrous and patently untrue.

Easy there, Mr. Pot. My comment was aimed squarely at those that wish to silence Michael Moore from saying anything - I'm sure I can be proven wrong here, but last I checked there wasn't an organized effort from "the left" to actually silence O'Reilly, Rush and Hannity like the campaign waged to prevent F9/11 from being seen - unless you count me praying every night that O'Reilly is taken off of WJFK so Ron and Fez can get a bump up.

Most of "the liberals" let those right wing talkers live and let live. I'm sure there are exceptions, much like those kids that called into Rush today to brag about sneaking into a screening of F9/11 and heckled it.

Anyway - should have been more clear - I was speaking specifcially of those that did not want Michael Moore to be able to release the film, and went to great lengths to try and see it happen.

Just like Mojo, quite correctly, points out a lot of lefties do with Moore's pablum.

Yeah...yeah...yeah...Mojo is the great libra like mediator who sees all sides...blah...blah...blah...

Meanwhile, I know I've had at least 2 or 3 good comments buried with my pablum where I took my own swipes at Moore in the last couple of weeks.

The problem is too many people don't hold both sides to equal standards. There's way too much 'hometeam' support. People should take of their lefty/righty rose glasses and look at things objectively.

Look. We actually agree 100%.

http://img21.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/44.jpg

"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB

blakjeezis

06-30-2004, 07:46 PM

Easy there, Mr. Pot.

It's cool, man. You can call me Pol.

There are organized efforts by leftist groups to undermine and disrupt the righty talkers' shows and whatnot (e.g. Hannity's first book was removed from prominent placement on book store shelves).

Your statement implied that Hannity et. al. don't get criticized and called biased and bullshit artists for what they say. That just isn't true. And I'm neither pot nor kettle, because I call Moore on his silly shit and I call Rush on his.

And I only mention Mojo because I know he's always got one finger on the 'Gulag Button', just like Uncle Joe, and I don't need that kind of stress in my life. Siberia's no place for a clean cut white boy.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 7-1-04 @ 12:07 AM

TheMojoPin

06-30-2004, 10:01 PM

There's nothing BUT white people in Siberia.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

NewYorkDragons80

06-30-2004, 10:44 PM

There's nothing BUT white people in Siberia.
Do Jews count?
http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~bmi/STEP2.jpg
Just kidding, folks

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

A.J.

07-01-2004, 01:06 PM

Some of these conspiracy theories Moore is throwing around remind me of those e-mails I used to get in the Clinton years: "Clinton had Vince Foster killed", "Clinton had Ron Brown killed", and "Clinton former Arkansas bodyguards all died under mysterious circumstances".

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

UnknownPD

07-01-2004, 01:09 PM

Corporate Michael Moore (http://rubbergashproductions.com/FINDING_FAHRENHEIT_911.htm)

UnknownPD

07-01-2004, 01:12 PM

There's nothing BUT white people in Siberia

Except for the tens of thousand indigenous eskimos

TheMojoPin

07-02-2004, 09:18 PM

Fahrenheit 9/11: The temperature at which Michael Moore's pants burn (http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20040702.html)

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

FMJeff

07-03-2004, 09:52 PM

So who the hell are we supposed to believe? I just saw Farenheight 9/11...and now I'm reading some of the informed responses to the film written by its detractors...they both make compelling arguements...Moore with his actual video footage and the detractors with press releases from big corporations which we are supposed to take at face value...

Who am I supposed to trust? Moore? Bush? These intellectual Moore detractors? As far as I'm concerned, the proof is in the footage. Or lack thereof...where is my WMD? Why are people still dying? Why do I still continue to read about conspiracy? You can only deny deny deny so long before the stink of your lies becomes too horrible to endure...

Moore may be a liar...but I like his lies better...sorry folks...his lies never killed anybody...

<center><img src="http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/fmjeff.gif">
 
It made my heart sing.

TheMojoPin

07-03-2004, 09:55 PM

There's a middle ground. People just need to be willing to keep themselves informed.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

HBox

07-03-2004, 10:09 PM

I've read this description of Fahrenheit 9/11 in a couple of places, and I tend to agree with it: Moore is using the same tactics Bush did in selling this war. Nothing they said was an outright lie, but many things were highly misleading.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

Recyclerz

07-04-2004, 12:22 AM

As usual, Krugman in the NYTimes sums up my opinion better than I do (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/02/opinion/02KRUG.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20O p%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists)

*especially at this hour of the morn.

Too lazy to click? Here are the best sound bites.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" is a tendentious, flawed movie, but it tells essential truths about leaders who exploited a national tragedy for political gain, and the ordinary Americans who paid the price.

There has been much tut-tutting by pundits who complain that the movie, though it has yet to be caught in any major factual errors, uses association and innuendo to create false impressions. Many of these same pundits consider it bad form to make a big fuss about the Bush administration's use of association and innuendo to link the Iraq war to 9/11. Why hold a self-proclaimed polemicist to a higher standard than you hold the president of the United States?

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
[b]There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon he never lived 'round here.[b]

This message was edited by Recyclerz on 7-4-04 @ 4:23 AM

Se7en

07-04-2004, 07:22 AM

Fahrenheit 9/11: The temperature at which Michael Moore's pants burn (http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20040702.html)

I had been planning to post this link, but Mojo beat me too it. An excellent article which points out.....well, Moore's usual lies and half-truth method of "documentary."

I also suggest anyone interested read the "Dude, Where's My Intellectual Honesty" article. Good stuff.

Oh, and if anyone has an issue with that link - it's by Spin Sanity. They're not exactly fond of President Bush, so don't confuse their criticism of Moore for simple partisan support of the incumbent.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/7_sig.gif" width="300" height="100">
 
 
Don't blame me....I voted for Kodos.
I look forward to an orderly election that will eliminate the need for a violent bloodbath. </center>

blakjeezis

07-04-2004, 10:49 AM

Moore may be a liar...but I like his lies better

I think that's all we can do at this point. Modern politics has come down to the question of whose lies you're going to pretend are true. You can kill yourself investigating and finding out the truth behind each candidate, and what is it good for? Absolutely nothing. (Say it again!) You're still left with the choice between two idiots. Bush is Bush, we all know what that means. And if you look up the word 'Hump' in the dictionary, you'll find a picture of John Kerry. The only thing I see coming from his election to the Presidency is four years of ineffectual governing. Not much will change. Someone said in my Stern thread that the FCC regulations won't change if Kerry becomes President. That's the entire problem in a single issue. These twats are out for themselves, not for us, no matter what lies they tell to get us to pick them.

So we choose the bullshit we're going to believe and we defend it to the death. But the reality is that untli there is an enormous overhaul to the campaign and election process we're really just pissing in the ocean.

<IMG SRC =http://www.blakjeezis.homestead.com/files/bloodjeez.gif>
If I were any better, I'd have to be twins!!
<marquee>INRI White people are so scared of blakjeezis INRI</marquee>
I'm Rick James, bitch!

FMJeff

07-04-2004, 01:58 PM

TheMojoPin

07-04-2004, 03:16 PM

I just wanna back up what Se7en said about SpinSanity.com (http://www.spinsanity.com). I whore that site here every chance I get, and their articles on Moore are exceptionally well-done. A fantastic counter-pundit site for talking heads on all sides.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Yerdaddy

07-04-2004, 10:13 PM

Recyclerz, is your sig pic a clip from the Seventh Seal?

I can go ahead and confirm that.

"This is my hand. I can move it, feel the blood pulsing through it. The sun is still high in the sky and I, Antonius Block, am playing chess with Death."

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

TheMojoPin

07-29-2004, 09:01 PM

In an article posted on his website on July 23, Michael Moore misconstrues the 9/11 Commission report, suggesting it supports two claims made in "Fahrenheit 9/11" when it actually sheds doubt on them. (http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_07_25_archive.html#1091128003981158 )

This is a really good SpinSanity update, as it helps keep track of Moore, but ALSO helps debunk the ludicrous "liberal = insult" ads Bush has been throwing at Kerry. (Scroll down to the middle of the page) (http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_07_25_archive.html#1091128003981158 )

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 7-30-04 @ 1:01 AM