Just saw Farenheit 9/11

[thehunter1320]

.......................... :|

all i wanted to know where that bit about the patriot act went

 

[Sai]

"the new york times have stated every fact in the movie can be verified and is in the public record. Look it up"

i really don't understand why people always choose to ignore you, may be b/c the want to keep argueing their useless points that can totally be turned down by this one thing, and if anything don't stop reminding them about it, eventually they'll acknowledge you

 

[CptStern]

hehe thx for the vote of confidence...but I'm getting tired of copying that line over and over

 

[Pogrom]

.......................... :|

all i wanted to know where that bit about the patriot act went

Sorry, people always seem to get carried away when the topic is anywhere in this general area. Since I am in China and have not yet seen F9/11, can anyone else answer this question?

What was the general gist of the Patriot Act section of F9/11?

 

[Bling]

i loved the movie, thought it really told about how american culture uses the weak and poor kids to fight for our freedoms and its true. The poorer areas of america dont have the jobs and money for a college education, or even enough money to support america, and i think that was the main idea of the movie, they are the backbone of our freedom.

I think everyone should see it. It was very funny at parts (bush quotes), sad and dramatic at parts, eye opening all wrapped into 140 mins.

awesome awesome movie.

 

[Rico]

Stop with this posting of bullcrap, if you're going to claim someone is wrong at least be right yourself. The American political doesn't favor any parties, because the framers were oppossed to the very ideas of political parties in the first place. Washington was a strong speaker against parties... look at his farewell address.

As for modern politics, I'd say that conservatives JUST got the upper hand in the system. The House and the Senate both had liberal (democrats) majorities for the past decade, so in reality if the political system were to be favoring anyone it would have been liberals and not conservatives.

Perhaps you people should get off your high horse and stop trying to argue conspiracy theories and actually do your research, a lot of the statements you're making are easily debunked and can be proven to be just fancily worded bull-crap.

Moore is not right about everything or anything, he simply argues HIS side of the political argument and makes his point. It doesn't mean the opposition couldn't and doesn't do the same you know...

I really love how people can get brainwashed by propaganda, do you reall ythink Moore has nothing to gain from spewing out anti-Bush propaganda? You people are truly naive aren't you?

 

[Pogrom]

Stop with this posting of bullcrap, if you're going to claim someone is wrong at least be right yourself. The American political doesn't favor any parties, because the framers were oppossed to the very ideas of political parties in the first place. Washington was a strong speaker against parties... look at his farewell address.

As for modern politics, I'd say that conservatives JUST got the upper hand in the system. The House and the Senate both had liberal (democrats) majorities for the past decade, so in reality if the political system were to be favoring anyone it would have been liberals and not conservatives.

Perhaps you people should get off your high horse and stop trying to argue conspiracy theories and actually do your research, a lot of the statements you're making are easily debunked and can be proven to be just fancily worded bull-crap.

Moore is not right about everything or anything, he simply argues HIS side of the political argument and makes his point. It doesn't mean the opposition couldn't and doesn't do the same you know...

I really love how people can get brainwashed by propaganda, do you reall ythink Moore has nothing to gain from spewing out anti-Bush propaganda? You people are truly naive aren't you?

Can you please point out specific arguments you have a problem with?

It makes comprehending your post much easier.

Who was claiming something was wrong?

 

[CptStern]

I really love how people can get brainwashed by propaganda, do you reall ythink Moore has nothing to gain from spewing out anti-Bush propaganda? You people are truly naive aren't you?

isnt that like the pot calling the kettle black?

 

[Rico]

Yeah I'm brainwashed because I do my own research instead of taking everything I hear as truth, You got me there!

Nice touch with the name on the quote too, was that suppossed to be funny CptFag? (oh look, I can be funny too!)

If you can't handle other people's opinions then you shouldn't be posting on forums kiddo.

PS: I won't bother explaining why you're wrong about me here, as I have done so in previous posts which you should have read before making yourself look like a bigger idiot than you have shown me to be. (perhaps you could learn how to argue a point from Javert, I'm sure he also knows what I'm talking about too...)

 

[Pogrom]

Yeah I'm brainwashed because I do my own research instead of taking everything I hear as truth, You got me there!

Nice touch with the name on the quote too, was that suppossed to be funny CptFag? (oh look, I can be funny too!)

If you can't handle other people's opinions then you shouldn't be posting on forums kiddo.

Hey hey...

We can keep it civil in here. CptStern - you have to admit that was a cheap shot.

Rico - you still haven't addressed my previous post.

 

[CptStern]

oooohhh cptFag what a zinger!

how will I ever recover!!!

meh I like the Suave part..suits you

ok ok it was cheap, but all in good fun...no need to take offense

edit: meh, no skin off my back, Rico. Some of you conservative types are so quick to anger

 

[Rico]

Pogrom: Perhaps it's because I was answering to a post in the first page of the thread, I had not refreshed the page so it doesn't have anything to do with the 2nd page of the thread. It's addressing the statement made by someone who said the political system was being controlled by conservatives and that they didn't give liberals a chance to change anything.

CptStern: I usually try to be polite and reasonable in all of my posts. However, I find no reason to be reasonable or polite to a person like you, specially when you choose to try to belittle me or 'mock' me because you do not agree with the content of my posts. It's also somewhat ironic that you choose to support Moore so much for bringing out issues to light and expressing his opinion on matters, all the while criticizing people who take a different stance on opposing ideals.

Please note that I will not reply to any of your posts anymore and any further attempts at trying to flame me will result in me promptly reporting your post to a moderator.

That being said, have fun arguing with yourself.

 

[oldagerocker]

chill... woah
Go have a cold shower!

 

[pat_thetic]

I'm going to have to agree with Rico on this one. Of all the posts I have read of cptsterns, most are negative, and a lot are flames.

 

[CptStern]

I'm going to have to agree with Rico on this one. Of all the posts I have read of cptsterns, most are negative, and a lot are flames.

out of all 900 posts? most are negative? meh, whatever

rico calls me a fag but I'm the one that flames. just drop it, it isnt that big of a deal

 

[Pogrom]

Pogrom: Perhaps it's because I was answering to a post in the first page of the thread, I had not refreshed the page so it doesn't have anything to do with the 2nd page of the thread. It's addressing the statement made by someone who said the political system was being controlled by conservatives and that they didn't give liberals a chance to change anything.

Well, you do have to admit that certain states are making it difficult for people to enroll. And that sometimes votes are 'conveniently' discounted.

 

[blahblahblah]

Time for me to weigh in on the subject yet again.

Can't exactly trust the New York Times. *cough*Jayson Blair*cough*

I do read the New York Times on occasion and never have been impressed with their writing (their business sections on the other hand is excellent).

I am also a Republican and I will not see Farenheit 911. Why? It's because Michael Moore is such a pompous bufoon (same thing goes for O'Reilly). I really can't stand people who are so confident. He can have his opinion but he needs to stop acting like he is infalliable. To be perfectly fair, Michael Moore does bring up some excellent points, but you can't mix that with opinion and expect people to call it gospel.

My friend (a democrat) recently watched Farenheit 911 and he even admitted that it was biased. Though he defended that Michael Moore did criticize Tom Daschel (hehe). Though he did say Michael Moore did bring up some good points but then "shot himself in the foot" by mixing in so much opinion.

From what I've heard of the movie, it serves no other purpose besides making Bush seem like an idiot. Granted that isn't hard since Bush isn't a very Charismatic president. I think Michael Moore would've gained respect from me (and others) if he would have focused on the events/results of 9/11 than showing clips of Bush fumbling through some of his speeches. Not very professional of Michael Moore if you ask me.

CptStern, are you from the US? Just wondering.

[Edit]: CptStern, I don't think you are purposely flaming people, but your writing style makes it appear that way.
[Edit 2]: It is incredible easy to vote. I registered in like 5 minutes. And it takes like an extra three minutes (couple months before an election) to fill out a paper to receive a mail-in ballot. Voting is one of the easiest things you can do. To bad it takes so much time to properly learn about all of the candidates and their stances on issues.

 

[Rico]

The popular vote is only part of the actual election procedure, the reason some people think their votes are discounted (and some indeed do make no difference) is because their votes don't actually count towards electing the president, instead, you are actually electing a representative who will vote for the candidate. If the majority of a state is liberal, a liberal representative is elected, same with conservatives and parties.

States are making it difficult to enroll? I don't really know about that, at least here in Texas if you want to regiter to vote you can even do it when you're getting your license, it just requires answering the question (they ask "do you want to register as a voter?"). Maybe it's different in other states, in which case I'd be glad if you provided me with some information on the subject. How are they making it more difficult for liberal voters to enroll, favoring conservatives?

 

[Razor]

Ok, but to the subject at hand, from what the press i have read and everyone's opinions of both Bowling and Fahrenheit, both movies are pretty much truthful. However, Michael Moore did not make the movies to show an unbiased point of view of Bush and the war in Iraq, it showed his views and only put in clips that supported his views.

Personally, i would not trust the opinions or comments or point of view of either Bush or Moore, i see both having their own agendas and political paths.

 

[pat_thetic]

Time for me to weigh in on the subject yet again.

Can't exactly trust the New York Times. *cough*Jayson Blair*cough*

I do read the New York Times on occasion and never have been impressed with their writing (their business sections on the other hand is excellent).

I am also a Republican and I will not see Farenheit 911. Why? It's because Michael Moore is such a pompous bufoon (same thing goes for O'Reilly). I really can't stand people who are so confident. He can have his opinion but he needs to stop acting like he is infalliable. To be perfectly fair, Michael Moore does bring up some excellent points, but you can't mix that with opinion and expect people to call it gospel.

My friend (a democrat) recently watched Farenheit 911 and he even admitted that it was biased. Though he defended that Michael Moore did criticize Tom Daschel (hehe). Though he did say Michael Moore did bring up some good points but then "shot himself in the foot" by mixing in so much opinion.

From what I've heard of the movie, it serves no other purpose besides making Bush seem like an idiot. Granted that isn't hard since Bush isn't a very Charismatic president. I think Michael Moore would've gained respect from me (and others) if he would have focused on the events/results of 9/11 than showing clips of Bush fumbling through some of his speeches. Not very professional of Michael Moore if you ask me.

CptStern, are you from the US? Just wondering?

[Edit]: CptStern, I don't think you are purposely flaming people, but your writing style makes it appear that way.

This is basically my position, except I'm not Republican(independent) and I am going to see it....

 

[CptStern]

CptStern, are you from the US? Just wondering?

no canada

[Edit]: CptStern, I don't think you are purposely flaming people, but your writing style makes it appear that way.

yes I must remember to use the sarcasm tags more often

 

[pat_thetic]

No, it's more that you act like you know everything, and your opinion is the only right one. That is how you come off as acting to me....

 

[CptStern]

No, it's more that you act like you know everything, and your opinion is the only right one. That is how you come off as acting to me....

oh jebus h-christ just let it go...can we go back to the subject at hand? I've posted a few times in this thread and I havent said anything besides "read the article"...no flaming, no "holier than thou attitude"

edit: I try to inject some humour and sarcasm in some of my posts..especially when people fly off the handle and say something that warrents a stern response (pun intended).

 

[pat_thetic]

In other threads you act that way though. Just some constructive criticism.

 

[CptStern]

I havent seen the movie yet, but I hope to see it soon (no time)

btw has anyone seen it who was for the war in iraq?


see? I'm purposefully trying to steer the thread back on topic

edit2: semantics ...I cant be blamed on how some people interpret what I say

 

[blahblahblah]

oh jebus h-christ just let it go...can we go back to the subject at hand. I've posted a few times in this thread and I havent said anything besides "read the article"

That is your problem. You say

pogrom, this is why I keep posting the line:

"the new york times have stated every fact in the movie can be verified and is in the public record. Look it up"

When you should say

I've read in the New York Times that every fact in the movie can be verified with public record.

Take a look at the two quotes. Each quote states the same exact facts, except the quote written by me will not (hopefully ) be interpreted as a flame. The way you write affects how people interprete your facts. Especially over the internet.

 

[clarky003]

hehe thx for the vote of confidence...but I'm getting tired of copying that line over and over

hehe yeh,, they just choose to ignore it to keep themselves contempt, to keep it solid in their mind that their country's 'fine'. and their leader isnt a liar, and doesnt hold back certain truths. Also seems very much so that its difficult for 16 year olds and 17 year olds on average to understanding how its not always as straight forward as watching the news, some intuition goes along way too and understanding physcology in politics and a country's immediate intrests (which always include large corporations )

if you ask me they confuse patriotism and the truth, and needs of the few and the many,

but god forbid Michael Moore bursting peoples happy little, 'country loving' bubble :O and stating many facts that are unanswered to this day.

like 'why' when all planes where grounded after the attacks, did the US government let an aircraft carrying Bin Ladens relatives take to the sky's to go where ever they where heading.

and 'why' they havnt released anything about the black box's on any of the aircraft. Then you could get some real confirmation about who and what was going on that day onboard the aircraft. and not just statements that can easily be of a misdirected nature.

and more recently Mr Powel accepting his error, when statistics where mistaken to show an increase of terrorism, when infact it was on the decrease. I mean.. wtf? thats a moron's error. Or he already knew and left the information to be uncovered later, after the war started.

The way you write affects how people interprete your facts

depends how intuitive you are, and what kind of mood your in. . so its not always as straight forward BlahBlahBlah

 

[Rico]

^^ Those are all overtly broad generalizations just asking to be debunked.

Oh alright, I'll do just one: When the Bin Laden's flew the whole country was allowed to fly again. They flew out the first day anyone were allowed to fly, so along with the Bin Laden family, many other normal businessmen also flew out to do their duties (as nervous as they were, their jobs ride on it sometimes).

Conspiracy theory or misinformation? You be the judge.

There's a lot more holes in your post but I'll leave those for someone else to cover.

 

[clarky003]

but theres holes in the information that we have anyway, its all holes . Its only the stuff we can see that be verified as having no holes.. words are just words at the end of the day. But see even your asking questions,, which is part of my point.. but you totally missed the important part.. why let Bin ladens relatives leave the country...? national intrest? because their Bush's buddy's? or he didnt want them to be in the country because it looked bad?, and more importantly, why cant they tell us ? that immediately makes it look suspicious

lets just face it dude, you know as little as I do. all the info you go through may be valid but its just as questionable... if you stay inside your head you'll be safe , because thats really all that matters to anyone.. no constructive input,, you dont consider it.. yes I admit I dont consider some of the Media's reports. but thats because half the time there as biased as hell.

call it a conspiracy theory. But if you think for one minute that everything mentioned is misinformation then you can always call the information you draw on possible misinformation too.. But I have reasons for saying what Im saying, and thats because you have to look at Bush's background,, his intrests, his relationship with Enron. and other US energy companies. His intrest firmly rests there, and Colin Powl's intrests too, their all looking for what they need, to be successful.. dont underestimate the human complextion

dont underestimate that in 10 or 20 years time you may find yourself with
barely any energy left to power the country, or neibouring country's. think of a world where only 10 or 30 % of the popultation have electricity, because their the only ones who can afford the sparse supply in such an over populated world.

a world where its nearly impossible to build enough nuclear powerplants to keep up the energy for everyday life in an accelerating overpopulated world. where oil has nearly depleted. And the poorer country's cant afford to build Nuclear power plants, because the divide between rich and poor would of increased to a point of invalidity.

Or world wars break loose over the remaining energy sources.. a devastating thought,.


but its the human condition, and however you try there are always people who want it all to themselves, because they want this.. or they want that. or they just enjoy it.

Im saying if he is one of those people, or is working in the intrests of people like this, then he may be damming not only the lives of some Iraqi's and other innocents they may have harmed. But damming the human race to a bleak future of global poverty literally throwing those without energy back into the stone age. and if you call me selfish for worrying about this. you a fool sir.

Im saying that its not unlikely that his intrests are directly linked with Oil, and giving the big companies more resources to squander in the future.

 

[Rico]

OH MY GOD, I JUST EDITED THE POST AND TYPED THE LONGEST ANSWER THAT DEBUNKED THE WHOLE THING and the stupid editing rule just deleted my whole post!!!! Ok this whole not being to edit aftr 15 mins is BS, this angers me to no end... I hate forums

Maybe I'll just retype the whole deal... ffs it was almost an article on the subject.

 

[Dan]

See, in America there are these things called "Lawyers". They like to do things such as "Sue" people who make up things and try and pass them of as the whole truth. Michael Moore, who many people belived he lied about alot in Bowling for Columbine, was never sued for anything related to that movie. Why? Because he didn't lie in it.

I'm not sure about the specifics in F9/11's case, but generally documentaries are checked by these "Lawyers" before a publisher will agree to publish it.

no no, you have it all backwards, the "lawyers" of which you speak use lies to sue people for trying to tell the truth, or for having slippery floors which cause the elderly to fall down and bump their heads.

 

[blahblahblah]

Wow, just wow.

I realize that Farenheit 911 does have some legitamacy to it, but lets stop with the unhealthy amount of paranoia.

You guys are sounding like when Fox (or whatever TV station) aired that "documentary" claiming that we never went to the moon. So many people started to just freak out when they saw that program. I just wanted to smack them upside the head. I have that same urge again.

 

[clarky003]

faking the moon landing is a little different, lol. thats just plain ridiculous

you can only see the text we are writing.. how do you know we are freaking out.. * psst, Blahblahblah's Physcic everyone.. *

seriously im sorry some of us arnt as conformed as others though

its not actually paranoia, its more like a bit of free thinking.

its not a pretty pretty lah lah, blah blah world you know. Even movie stars would agree, that politicians have much bigger ego's. you cant be timid and unconfident to be a leader... can you?

I just thought if thats the case aswell, well you do that math

big ego's + power

 

[Rico]

Well well well... this is all rather pleasing. It has happened a second time and still don't know why I bother typing this again but let's hope everything works out this time.

Here's a much shorter explanation than the one I attempted the earlier 2 times I tried to post this:

Reasons why the Laden family should (and was)be let go:

1) First we must provide some background for the family to allow us to better understand them.

The Laden family is comprised of many people, thousands and thousands of members all around the world. They are a very powerful and influential family that gained much wealth and power from wisely investing all over the world. Before the 9/11 attacks they were known as respectable and humane people, several of their members contributed (and probably still do it) to major charities all around the world. They also funded a lot of major projects in different countries which would have otherwise not been possible without them. Particularly in America, they control around 3% to 7% of the economy in general, making them very powerful individuals. They also control numerous economical assets in other important countries.

2) Now we start with the actual reasons. Put yourself in the shoes of a member of the Bin Laden family in the US at the time of the 9/11 attacks. There are many things being reported all over the world but only one name stays the same in America, you always hear the name "Bin Laden" used in the media in combination with 9/11 attacks and terrorists. all around the country injustices are being commited, ironically, in the name of justice. Middle eastern immigrants are beat up and discriminated against during the aftermath period, the attacker's reason? "They could be terrorists!".

Now flash back to being a Bin Laden. You're surrounded by Americans, the people who hate you for what a member of your family did (who they might not have even met, their family is HUGE) and your life is in danger and the danger increases for every second you stay in the country. What do you do? Do you stay and face possible death or leave and go back to your homeland where it might be safer for you to stay? For me that wouldn't have been a decision at all, I predict the same situation for them.

3) Bush. Moore deliveratly makes it seem in his movie as if Bush is supporting terrorism out of greed and helping the Bin Laden family escape the country in return for some oil or such. Let's look at things in a more reasonable manner shall we?

a) As Bush you have a few choices. You can allow the family to go back home in the first flight they can catch so that they can avoid certain harm in the US or you can detain them and not allow them to leave when they ask you. This would entail placing them under national protection (using American tax dollars) to avoid attacks on the family members. It also entails possible scandal, should the information be leaked that Bush is "helping terrorists" (a point already debunked in #1) and even worse, protecting them with American tax dollars!! These accusations may seem crazy now after I explained all of this, but should the general public find out about it you can bet they will be uninformed, and you can bet they will say the same thing.

b) If you're Bush in the actual context of things, you let the family go and avoid further scandals (you hope). They are probably interrogated before leaving and allowed to go back after they fail to provide much information because the members weren't very close to Osama and its likely they knew nothing about the plans. This not only saves you some trouble and avoids more deaths but it also saves some money.

4) The Bin Laden innocent has rights as international immigrants and/or US citizens. They have the right to free speech, life and liberty. Bush could not have detained these people because they commited no crimes, only an individual within their family did. Detaining them would have also endangered their lives (as explained before) and would have been inhumane. Imagine yourself being put in jail or in detainment because some guy with your same last name happened to murder someone. Do we just arrest all the Johnsons in the country because one Johnson commited a crime?

I originally listed many more reasons but I'm simply too tired to retype them all. However, I believe this is enough to back the fact that actually detaining them would have been a worse idea and brought by much more violence and injustice in the country. The Laden family did not commit a crime, a black sheep did, therefore unless you have certain proof that the rest of the family was involved there is no problem with the family leaving the country, specially when they have good reason to fear for their lives.

See, it's funny that people keep claiming that Moore didn't lie in his films but every time I hear it I just smile and nod. I never claimed he lied, in fact I can state that all the facts he mentions in the movies are true indeed, for the most part at least. What I do preach to deaf ears is the following:

Moore ise lying and that's not the issue. That's how Moore CHOOSES to paint the issue so that he may debunk it more easily. What's the problem then? Simple, he leads people on to the wrong conclusions with his 'facts'. While he presents some really good points he also avoids some major ones like the stuff I mentioned in the top part of the post, he gives no background on the family and gives no reasons why Bush may have let them go. The result? People jump to the conclusion that all the Bin Laden's were involved in the attacks and that not detaining them amounts to supporting terrorism. Isn't this the conclusion all of you Moore supporters drew when you watched the movie? I can clearly see it is based on what you've posted.

Can you honestly tell me you would have drawn the same conclusion had you know all the facts I just mentioned? I can assure you that you would have not, but Moore clearly selected the information that best suited him and used it all together to piece together his creation. It's all a combination of Bush quotes taken out of context to further prove his point.

Everything seems more balanced when you take both points of view into account doesn't it? I'd say it does, and thus why I have said a lot of you have been brainwashed by Moore's movie. Is that a good thing? Good from an entertainer's POV, he did his job very well. From a political view? Propaganda.

Now let me ask you some questions: Why does Moore choose to ignore the facts I outline in this post? If he were truly trying to inform the people of the "truth" he would have actually provided all of this information, it should have been his duty ti inform people. This however, is not what Moore actually does. He represents and supports liberal thinking and propaganda on a large scale. He may call himself and 'independent' but we can clearly see that is not the case, he is trying to get Kerry elected and Bush out of office, as simple as that. He provides political propaganda in the guise of entertainment, this is the exact reason why Disney even refused to publish their movie. I'm sure they had al ot to gain from publishing so many flops and refusing to publish a sure-hit movie under their name... lots to gain (right?). Or maybe, maybe they saw it as I do, as political propaganda aimed at supporting the deposition of Bush from office and the placement of the obvious pawn, Kerry. Disney thought it would be wise to steer away from the political game and did as I would have done, however, Moore attempted out of revenge (look at what he does, you can clearly see he is a vengeful man) to slander Disney by saying it was "in their political interest to support Bush, as well as in their economic interest, because Jebb Bush supported some of their projects". Seems to me like he's just trying to make them look bad out of spite.

Now I hope all of you take this information and use it to build up your knowledge on the subject. I have seen Moore's film and took it for what it was worth, not facts, but pure propaganda. It did not teach me anything I did not already know and it did not help me make my political mind. I saw it as entertainment, pure and simple.

Perhaps you people should too...

PS: I believe Bush most likely have had ulterior motives that I did not explain but that can be said for all parties in the matter. Thosem otives are known only to them and speculating on them is formulating a conspiracy theory based on groundless facts and accusations.

Edit: Clarky as you can see my information isn't "full of holes" as you claim it is. I believe I'm fairly knowledgeable on the subject and have done much research on the topics in the past. All my facts are from reputable sources (all news are biased, it is your duty as a citizen to know what is biased and to what extent, this is the only way to get unbiased info, by looking at both issues under the same spotlight) and some even from personal experience.

 

[clarky003]

you wrote all of that after mis reading my post :O,, I wasnt accusing the rest of the family of being involved, I was wondering why the government cant give a direct answer as to the reason of the flight. and other answers to the questions about the black box's, and the candle in the cake.. the accusations of weapons of mass destruction. which still havnt been found, even though people where told that they had proof Saddam had those weapons .. bringing Saddam into the conflict. To date , no comprehensive explaination. which is what the public deserve

you say yoours has no holes and it 'debunks' questions, thats a foolish statement, as thats just your opinion. mine may be equally unjustified, but both are just 'opinions of what happened. Either could of well occured. The truth is what matters... not what 'you' would of done in their shoes.. lol, how can you possibly know. How do you know that something completely different happenend, you dont. and neither do I.

again im just stating my belief through justification of what drives the world.. 'energy'

its consequential and the most important thing to humans right now.

your justifying your belief through the consequences of making sure you play it clean, and yes in order to avoid accusations and critisim he would want that. But still. where's the whys? its not as straight forward as you make it out. But one things for sure, they want confusion.. because they have it.. and thats perplexing.. because they only create that in the public if they want to cloud judgement , and create a protective barrier for themselves, so they can operate without disturbance. working out their plan. not lisening to anyone but the groups of people who are stated in such a position as to demand, and satisfy public desire. only to be exploited.

if you werent so biased, maybe you could realise Moore's not ignoring that.. its an unkown bunch of facts youve just stated. its all wishy washy, this and that happened, yep I believe that happened because it makes most sense and satisfy's my world and my way of thinking. Both arguments may be completely wrong, you dont aknowledge that. Hes just approaching it from a different angle.. and you have a problem with that? he might be right, might be wrong. no big deal. Leave the guy alone he has freedom of speech just like you or I, only difference , hes a journalist., dont be a hypocrit

It's all a combination of Bush quotes taken out of context to further prove his point.

Lol, they where from some of the most important speech's hes made. not every speech has Bush telling fibs, no one in the world could lie that much .

wake up,, propaganda is all around us. You think Bush using his patriot speech's isnt Propaganda? you think giving false information about nuclear warheads in Iraq isnt propaganda.. wake up and smell the air.. its not as clean as it appears. Nothing is as straight forward as you make it out to be. The world is chaotic full of power abuse. and workings outside the law.. coverups at a high level of government would be flawless. If no one in the world even tryed to look for something. then you people who follow the 'truth' told by the media. may aswell just live in a bubble where no such things exist.

 

[DimitriPopov]

sounds to me as though he has not even seen the movie, just basing his opinion on his fascist outlook

What the fck.

Naho, dat old Micha-el more ain't talking the trooth about nothin, he just usin dat magic pica-ture box to get his face out there.

I trust Michael Moore alot more than most other american "truth-sayers". Haven't seen Fahrenheit 9/11 yet, waiting for it to come to Sweden but Bowling for Columbine was utterly brilliant in every way. Also Dude Where's my Country is always good as is The awful truth

Bowling for Columbine was all about using loaded footage of 9/11 and passing the blame of murder onto those not responsible for those murders all in the name of building Michale Moores BRILLIANT shit stirring cred. Also , cutting up and pasting back together interviews to say what you want them to never hurt any fat documentary makers.

 

[The Terminator]

Im from Canada. I wanna see it because I think Bush is a moron and could quite possibly be the worst/most stupid president the US has ever had.

 

[The Terminator]

Bowling for Columbine was all about using loaded footage of 9/11

What? Did you even see it? Its about the school shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado.

 

[DarkStar]

Perhaps you people should get off your high horse and stop trying to argue conspiracy theories and actually do your research, a lot of the statements you're making are easily debunked and can be proven to be just fancily worded bull-crap.

Yeah I'm brainwashed because I do my own research instead of taking everything I hear as truth

I have researched and actually looked into this sort of stuff instead of blindingly accepting Moore's film as 100% true

All this coming from the guy who was claiming Kerry was drafted into Vietnam in another thread. Yeah, go ahead and do research for yourself Rico, don't want you doin' mine. Kerry willingly enlisted in the Navy in 1965.

 

[Rico]

Actually my post has nothing to do with yours, zilch, bsesides the last edit after I saw yours. My post is actually littered with facts that you may check up on if you so desire. I wrote almost the same info (a lot more and even more detailed too) I posted in an edit a few minutes before but I wrote su much my 15 mins to edit the post went by. That had nothing to do with your post.

Oh and by the way that's not an "In their shoes, I would have done this" post, it's an actual representation of as many facts I could gather. Please, instead of trying to make *me* prove a point, why don't YOU tell me why the Laden family shouldn't have been allowed to leave the country? Do you have certain proof that the members of the family in the US had something to do with the attacks?

I also explained why the government wouldn't answer why they let them go in detail, had you taken the time to read and understand my post. How could I possibly know? Read my post and then absorb it, then read it again and write a good reply to it. You will notice I never said "this is what happened" it's an overview of RATIONAL explanations of what could have or did happen backed by fact, which is a lot more than what you're providing me.

And no conspiracy theories please, I've noticed most political posts revolve around them.

PS: How exactly am I biased? Because I have researched and actually looked into this sort of stuff instead of blindingly accepting Moore's film as 100% true and reasonable? Should I just adopt your views because you and Moore say you're right and I'm wrong? Think about who's conforming here, the mass of people who thinks its 'cool' to watch a controversial movie and agree with it, or the minority who dares challenge the actual truths behind such film and put their stuff on the line?

Oh and to tell you the truth I couldn't possibly be biased, I hate Bush as much as I hate Moore and I hate Kerry too. I actually can't think of anyone worse than all these candidates for election and it truly saddens me to say so. Oh also I am unable to vote due to the fact that I'm an international student so I really have nothing to gain.

Maybe I should just give up and declare it a lost cause, I tried my best but you have obviously proven you don't want to consider the other side of the issue and are adamant in believing you are right. Go ahead and follow the fad of hating the president, it's all the rage now! "It's so political man, it's like South Park!!" (this is an actual quote from real life by the way)

Welcome to America, where it's cool to be misinformed.

PS: Giving up on this thread too, I should have known that all Moore threads will just go in a circular path. I try to bring something new to the table and someone spews out more blind fanaticism. Figures...

DarkStar: I never said I was sure it was true, I said "I think he might have been drafted". I could really care less about Kerry seeing as I'm not interested in him in the least. Go ahead and do your own research but don't try to beat my argument by pointing out personal flaws, that's a fallacy buddy. (I see you did exactly as I predicted, you have nothing else to use against my post so you simply used an invalid argument trying to point to a past flaw.)

I rest my case.