Members the_resonator Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by flukewurm jesus im glad somebody said it. nobody reads ol' reso's posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Hitches is a hard core right winger, and also an incredible drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Analog Kid Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 i think Bush is just what America needs and Moore's film misses the big quetions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 Hitches is a hard core right winger, and also an incredible drunk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem Originally posted by Analog Kid i think Bush is just what America needs and Moore's film misses the big quetions. It certainly dodges the question of ages - "What's For Dinner Tonight?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pgunders Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Hitchens has some valid points against Moore's film, but I wouldn't cite Hitchens as an example of an anti-dogmatic thinker. He's been trying to put together his own little cult of personality for years. More than anything, the sense I got from reading his review of Fahreneit 9/11 was that he resented Moore's success (especially when he lets drop how many documentaries he's made). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AfroRouge Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 His argument would have been strengthened if he had started with the Project for the New American Century, which the core people in the Bush squad (including Jed) sponsored are a part of and which specifically hoped for a "pearl harbor style event" to sell their plan of global military dominance to a rattled American public in a September 2000 publication. To me, that has been the absolute proof that 9/11 has been ruthlessly and shamefully exploited by the administration - it has been their plan since long before they entered office, and it's no secret. These are outright facists - power by strength of arms, with a healthy dose of superiority complex to boot. Omitting this is a sad flaw in Moore's film. Their website:http://www.newamericancentury.org/ Note the names in the Statement of Principals:http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm The report with the Pearl Harbor statement is here (see pg. 63):http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 Hitches is a hard core right winger, and also an incredible drunk. Yoozer's reply to this got it about right. What I think Mike means is "anyone who disagrees with my narrow view is a hard core right winger". That just "politics as religion" at work, like I said. Everyone should use their own mind to decide, instead. Whatever else Hitchens is, he ain't right-wing. He has written for The Nation for a long time, and if that magazine isn't "left", I don't know what is. I think he's mad because he's afraid that Moore will discredit some causes that he (Hitchens) believes in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AfroRouge Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 I do agree M. Moore is a terrible spokesman for the "left." He makes pretty good documentaries, but he's pretty much an ideologue and can't speak extemporaneously without sounding like a hot-headed fool. The right would be glad to have him become the Liberal Messiah (even more glad than if Dean were the presidential candidate), since he probably won't convince anyone who isn't already converted, except through his films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 \ Yoozer's reply to this got it about right. What I think Mike means is "anyone who disagrees with my narrow view is a hard core right winger". \ No, the poster claimed Hitchens was a liberal. In fact, this has been a White House talking point on this issue They are shooting the Hitchens review out than attaching " even the liberal hitchens" says this, etc. It;s a blatant lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 \think Bush is just what America needs and Moore's film misses the big quetions\ Is this a joke? Check out what has been happening to clean air, clean water and public lands laws the past few years. Add to that serious "tweaks" of the constitution, the massive gaining of coreporate welfare and huge power surges for the FCC ( telling people what they can and cant hear). Dont just look at this, loo kat all the issues involved. It;s horrific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 \think Bush is just what America needs and Moore's film misses the big quetions\ Is this a joke? Check out what has been happening to clean air, clean water and public lands laws the past few years. Add to that serious "tweaks" of the constitution, the massive gaining of coreporate welfare and huge power surges for the FCC ( telling people what they can and cant hear). Dont just look at this, loo kat all the issues involved. It;s horrific. So, Mike..... your last name isn't "Moore", is it??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted June 30, 2004 Members Share Posted June 30, 2004 I wish I had his bank account The facts speak for themselves. If you dislike censorship, if you like well enforced environmental regulations on clean air,water, and land, if you like less corporations in your goverment, if you like a more even handed foreign policy , if you like medical privacy, workers rights, advocation of scientific research don't vote for Bush. His record on these issues is truly horrible.It's not just about Iraq. Far, far from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 Without giving away the film *ahem*, I thought it was incredible. stop the presses!!! me and the old man have been wanting to see it for a while now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 I wish I had his bank account The facts speak for themselves. If you dislike censorship, if you like well enforced environmental regulations on clean air,water, and land, if you like less corporations in your goverment, if you like a more even handed foreign policy , if you like medical privacy, workers rights, advocation of scientific research don't vote for Bush. His record on these issues is truly horrible. It's not just about Iraq. Far, far from it. I dislike censorship in any form, and all the right-wing-nuts who want to somehow restrict Moore's movie are just putting money in his pocket. It's crazy, really.Here is Newsweek jumping on the bandwagon, about how absurd and unfair Moore's claims are..... this is never going to stop, but it won't stop people from believing his films, either.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/Again, these people aren't claiming that everything Moore says is nonsense.. just that there seem to enough legitimate gripes about Bush that he didn't really have to go fabricate a bunch of stuff, but he fabricated anyway. So much for "documentary". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AfroRouge Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 The article makes good points, but I think they miss the point that this film isn't so much documentary as filmed political essay. That it's filed under "documentary" doesn't make it one. Yes, it's full of opinion, and tries to raise suspicion and doubt where perhaps none should exist, but it's all for political effect. The Saudi-Bush connection, the relationship to the Taliban and all the rest can be debated endlessly, because outside of the House of Saud and the House of Bush, and the Carlyle Group, no one really knows how deep the rabbit hole goes. The hard facts that are in the film are numerous enough to make claims that the entire film is a "lie" totally perposterous. Where, after all, are the weapons of mass destruction? Where was this imminent threat Iraq posed? I thought the clips of Rice and Powell saying that Iraq was basically contained and impotent when they first came to office were among the more interesting and hard-to-ignore moments of the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scubyfan Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by AfroRouge The article makes good points, but I think they miss the point that this film isn't so much documentary as filmed political essay. That it's filed under "documentary" doesn't make it one. Yes, it's full of opinion, and tries to raise suspicion and doubt where perhaps none should exist, but it's all for political effect. The Saudi-Bush connection, the relationship to the Taliban and all the rest can be debated endlessly, because outside of the House of Saud and the House of Bush, and the Carlyle Group, no one really knows how deep the rabbit hole goes. The hard facts that are in the film are numerous enough to make claims that the entire film is a "lie" totally perposterous. Where, after all, are the weapons of mass destruction? Where was this imminent threat Iraq posed? I thought the clips of Rice and Powell saying that Iraq was basically contained and impotent when they first came to office were among the more interesting and hard-to-ignore moments of the film. I don't think one can overlook some of the serious issues that Moore raises, and it seems to me that the part most people disagree with are his conclusions, ie, that all of it ends in money and power. His facts are facts - we can agree on that much, right? So I think a lot of critics are being unfair in jumping on his conclusions, but such is politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Boom Posted July 1, 2004 Author Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 While I'm no worshipper of Moore, I have to respect the fact that he is standing up and saying something. It seems like the majority of Americans are drugged or something, or maybe they arent drugged and that's the problem. The hippies would have protested what G-dub is doing, while modern day Americans don't seem to care as long as they can afford to gas up their SUV and eat fast food everyday for lunch. After all it is about terror and liberating the Iraqi people from that horrible dictator right? Well 28 people were executed today in China for dealing drugs. I think this is the first thread I've started that got up th 4 pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by scubyfan His facts are facts - we can agree on that much, right? I don't think you have been reading the rest of the thread. Moore's problem is that many of his "facts" aren't facts at all, like the whopper that the Saudis "gave" the Bush family $1.4 billion dollars. In many cases, he comes to possibly valid conclusions while making up a lot of the "facts" along the way, so as to persuade skeptical people in his audience, I guess. Most of the objections to Moore come from the fact that he has played fast-n-loose with the facts, and may wind up hurting his own cause because of it. In any case, his wallet is bulging, and maybe that's all that matters. So, no.... we *can't* agree with Moore's facts. Be careful which ones you quote, and check them out with other, more reliable sources first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 ++ I don't think you have been reading the rest of the thread. Moore's problem is that many of his "facts" aren't facts at all, like the whopper that the Saudis "gave" the Bush family $1.4 billion dollars.++ Thats the business Caryle and it's owned groups have done with the Bushies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scubyfan Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by Green Red Brown I don't think you have been reading the rest of the thread. Moore's problem is that many of his "facts" aren't facts at all, like the whopper that the Saudis "gave" the Bush family $1.4 billion dollars.In many cases, he comes to possibly valid conclusions while making up a lot of the "facts" along the way, so as to persuade skeptical people in his audience, I guess. Most of the objections to Moore come from the fact that he has played fast-n-loose with the facts, and may wind up hurting his own cause because of it. In any case, his wallet is bulging, and maybe that's all that matters.So, no.... we *can't* agree with Moore's facts. Be careful which ones you quote, and check them out with other, more reliable sources first. First of all, he never once states they directly gave to the Bushes 1.4 bil. If you saw the movie and paid attention, the money went to the interests and investments, which the Bushers benefit from. Please list all the facts that you think are invalid. I am curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rintincop Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 ___________________________ Michael Isikoff and Newsweek Magazine Deceive the Public About Fahrenheit 9/11http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/f911facts/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rintincop Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 _______Framing Michael Moorehttp://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/framing_michael_moore/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rintincop Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 _________Village Voice: "The Attack on Fahrenheit 9/11: Fox lays back while ABC and NBC pile on"http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/mikeinthenews/index.php?id=43 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by Mike51 ++I don't think you have been reading the rest of the thread. Moore's problem is that many of his "facts" aren't facts at all, like the whopper that the Saudis "gave" the Bush family $1.4 billion dollars.++Thats the business Caryle and it's owned groups have done with the Bushies. Sure, but the money went to a business the Carlyle owned that was *sold* before Bush I became an investor. This was explained in both the links I posted. More of Moore's fuzzy math. We're just talking past one another, dude. We're not going to convince one another, because you are a True Believer. Keep parroting Moore's "facts" all you want. That snickerng sound is your more knowledgeable friends laughing behind your back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Green Red Brown Posted July 1, 2004 Members Share Posted July 1, 2004 Originally posted by scubyfan First of all, he never once states they directly gave to the Bushes 1.4 bil. If you saw the movie and paid attention, the money went to the interests and investments, which the Bushers benefit from. Please list all the facts that you think are invalid. I am curious. How did they benefit, if the business in question was sold *before* they became investors?? How did their Saudi "connections" get them any money that way?? I've posted a few links that describe Moore's deceptions, and Rintincop has posted a few from the other side. I don't have *nearly* enough time to go put together a summary for you. Either you will read both sides, and make up your own mind, or you will make up your own mind without all the facts. Suit yourself. Being informed is hard work, and I can't do it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.