NationStates Jolt Archive

So, has anybody seen Mike Moore's new film, or have any thoughts on it?

Only that I would like to see it when it opens.

Havent seen it yet, but if you want to see a good doc with a good message, go see Supersize Me

It hasn't opened yet, but I have already purchased tickets to see it Friday night, 6:30 p.m.

I hear that showings in the US have been limited to only 500 Theaters accross the entire country?!

Whats the deal with that? Why are movie theaters not widely showing it?
Surely it'd draw huge crowds...

Of the reviews that I've heard, they all seem to be pretty much saying that anyone who sits on the fence going in, will fall off about a quarter way through, especially the scene where Bush is told of the 911 attacks, and sits with an expression of child-like bewilderment for a full 11 MINUTES, not knowing what to do or where to go...

I've seen the trailer, but can't wait to see the whole thing..

i dont know about that, but i know that im definatley going to go see michael moore hates america (btw, yes he is the anti christ incarnate, but the big one was a really good documentary/movie)

i dont know about that, but i know that im definatley going to go see michael moore hates america (btw, yes he is the anti christ incarnate, but the big one was a really good documentary/movie)You're going to go and see the film that criticises him, without actually seeing whats being criticised?

And now I'm going to go away and disapprove of things I've never heard of

Definately not going to see it.... Well, let me rephrase that. I'm not going to pay money to see it. Just like Moore's Bowling for Columbine, this movie is going to be a bunch of staged scenes and butchered quotes all meant to press his liberal propaganda.
Now don't get me wrong! He has the perfect right to say it, and I don't want to censure him or anything. I'm just not going to promote his views by giving him money.
If a friend buys the movie, or I have some other chance to see it without forking over cash I'll see it. But until then, nope.

I am not against somebody making a documentary about Bush, but I don't want it to be the manipulative, anti-bush Mike Moore.

A film by a nuetral person would be nice, not a film by someone who will warp everything to kick dirt in George's face!

Michael Moore is a blood-thirsty maniac! Head for the hills!

Mooninininites, I can respect that. I'm going to see it (and I'm a fan), but I can understand why it wouldn't be for everyone.

I'm curious to see his take on these matters. While I don't agree slavishly with everything Moore says, I believe that each of his films has at least kept certain important issues alive, and have generally served to raise the level of debate in this country.

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.

Michael Moore dislikes the policies of Bush and his administration. He also has issues regarding the mass firings of workers (including those who have worked for certain companies all their lives), the American attitude towards violence (as opposed to gun ownership, if you ever watched "Bowling for Columbine"), and what he sees as a growing megacorporate influence on American culture.

He is in no way, shape, or form "Anti-American". One can dissent with views expounded by the current administration and still be patriotic.

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
http://www.webcases.com/m3073.jpg
This troll wears a skirt to hide his complete lack of testicles.

So, has anybody seen Mike Moore's new film, or have any thoughts on it?im seeing it next friday

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.republicans hate the middle class and cannibalize the american people for the greed of the maggot class

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
Do you have specific comments or actions of his to back that up with?

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

I saw Michael Moore being interviewed on NBC's show Dateline. He convinced me why I can't see it. For one, he says that the Saudis evacuated after 9/11 weren't interviewed by the FBI. The 9/11 commission says otherwise. For another, when he asks Congressmen if they'd send their kids to Iraq, he purposely cut some of their responses out if it suited him best. On another note, Ray Bradbarry found the movie disgusting. I read Farenheit 451, and I think that the borrowing of the title was inappropriate. It'd have worked better if it were a piece on censorship, but not a political documentary.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

he is anti american because he uses his right to free speech? you should think sometime

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.maybe if you knew ANYTHING about american history at all youd know that France saved America during Revolutionary wartimes and was instrumental in freeing america from British tyranny--try turning off your foxnews lies and tuning into reality for once

Exercising your right to free speech dosen't mean you any more or less Anti-American. Osama talks, but he's not pro-American. Aaron Burr (or whatever his name waS) that tried to lead a revolt in the West against America in the early 1800's, the Civil War Confederates... they all talked, but were firmly against America.

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

Well, if that isn't a lovely comment.

I'd have to say anyone who speaks out against the government and fights for what they believe is MORE AMERICAN than most people. The men who founded our nation did not sit back and mindlessly agree, or just get half the information. They caused a stir and were seen as liberal nuts. I hope to God I'm not the only person who believes that THINKING FOR YOURSELF and causing a stir and knowing what you believe is much more American than mindlessly agreeing with our government.

Now, I've seen Bowling for Columbine and I agreed with some of it. I do think that Michael Moore likes to spin things to his advantage. It's a trick that any good politician would use. I don't agree with how pushy he can be, and there were other things in Bowling for Columbine that I didn't like. But his general message was good. (Seriously, we are a violent nation.)

I may see his new documentary. I agree with Purly Euclid, it is poorly titled. Farenhite 451 is a wonderful book, but it's not about politics, it's about censorship. I think Moore needed a little more time to consider his title. And while I don't exactly agree with the war in Iraq, for some reason I doubt I'll be as violently against it as Moore is.

the real people who hate america are the ones who support and defend the Patriot Act

I bet Mike Moore is glad he's getting this much attention from NS if he knows it. THere are so many of these threads.

I bet Mike Moore is glad he's getting this much attention from NS if he knows it. THere are so many of these threads.Mike Moore is a fat egotistical basterd but at least he speaks the truth

I saw Michael Moore being interviewed on NBC's show Dateline. He convinced me why I can't see it. For one, he says that the Saudis evacuated after 9/11 weren't interviewed by the FBI. The 9/11 commission says otherwise. For another, when he asks Congressmen if they'd send their kids to Iraq, he purposely cut some of their responses out if it suited him best. On another note, Ray Bradbarry found the movie disgusting. I read Farenheit 451, and I think that the borrowing of the title was inappropriate. It'd have worked better if it were a piece on censorship, but not a political documentary.I don't think that you were going to see it before though Purly Euclid. Farenheit 451: the temperature at which books burn. Farenheit 9/11, the date at which lies and truth merge together as tools of the rolling Bush propaganda machine.

I also heard about that cut thing, but then I heard a source that said they called the senator who supposedly said yes and he didn't know anything about it. If Moore did it, then its bad, but I think its possible that its just a discrediting tactic. And yes, I am going to see the film

I wonder where people get the idea that documentary=journalism. They're not the same and never have been.

Journalism is theoretically objective and unslanted--I say theoretically because in practice it is rarely objective or unbiased, but the way the teachers present the job in college is that the journalist is supposed to be outside the story.

Documentary is by its very nature biased and one-sided. It's the telling a story through the eyes of a particular person and that person has an axe to grind, a story to tell. It's biased from the outset, no matter how much the documentarian tries to stay out of the film. Watch any documentary and you see what point the filmmaker is trying to present.

So the key then needs to be, not if the filmmaker has an agenda, but whether or not the filmmaker has his story straight. Are the facts accurate? Are they presented honestly? And according to all early accounts, Moore has his facts straight in this movie.

Purly, you accused the 9/11 Commission of saying that the Saudis that were evacuated after 9/11 were interviewed by the FBI--I'd like to see that in writing. And I'd like to see whether or not they were interviewed before they left the country or afterward. The last thing I read, Richard Clarke affirmed Moore's story, and the TIA affirmed that the flights did occur on 9/13. If you can contradict that, I'd like to see it.

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.
Can you explain why you think Michael Moore hates America?

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.
Can you explain why you think Michael Moore hates America?

Er, are you actually asking FoB for an explanation that requires more than mouth-frothing rhetoric? Dude, if you are, get a soda or something, because that's gonna take awhile.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

Well, if that isn't a lovely comment.

I'd have to say anyone who speaks out against the government and fights for what they believe is MORE AMERICAN than most people. The men who founded our nation did not sit back and mindlessly agree, or just get half the information. They caused a stir and were seen as liberal nuts. I hope to God I'm not the only person who believes that THINKING FOR YOURSELF and causing a stir and knowing what you believe is much more American than mindlessly agreeing with our government.Think of all the founding fathers who came up with pithy quotes like "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny, when the government fear the people there is liberty" and "those who are willing to give up essential liberties to gain some temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security". Looks like Moore is exactly what the architects of America had in mind

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

You would have been correct if you subsituted MOORE for US. Soldiers, Marines, airmen/women, and seamen. Remember they are the ones willing to sacrifce their life's blood for this country. Something that fat tub MOORE i doubt is willing to do...Remember that please.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.
Is America reserved to people who think like you? How do you figure Michael Moore is anti-American?

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.
Can you explain why you think Michael Moore hates America?

Er, are you actually asking FoB for an explanation that requires more than mouth-frothing rhetoric? Dude, if you are, get a soda or something, because that's gonna take awhile.
Well I am going to give my son a ride to the theater...will that be enough time? 8)

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

You would have been correct if you subsituted MOORE for US. Soldiers, Marines, airmen/women, and seamen. Remember they are the ones willing to sacrifce their life's blood for this country. Something that fat tub MOORE i doubt is willing to do...Remember that please.Yeah, cos Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush and the rest are all really patriotic and served their country. :roll:

I'm going to see it, I really enjoyed Bowling for Columbine, it kind of put things in perspective. I'm a conservative but I do believe there is some truth behind what he says.

I think it would be better to say it has facts, rather than truths. You can use facts to make one kind of truth (splicing a meeting of the NRA after Columbine for example) and use the same facts to make another (point out how the meeting had been scheduled for years before, and was completely unrelated).

*sighs*

Michael Moore is many things. Anti-Republican? Yes. As far left-wing as it's possible to go without falling off? Yes. A firm believer in the ends justifying the means? Yes. A hypocritical dramaqueen? Yes. About as removed from reality as Rush Limbaugh on acid? Yes.

Anti-America? No. He wants to try to help it, misguided as I think he is. His vision of a perfect America, in my eyes, would be a nation that had abandoned its responsibility as the leading power in the world, and I'd fight him on that, but he does think he's working for the betterment of the American people. (And very much so for the good of his wallet, but that's true of every public figure.)

Look at it this way: the mass media, for all its liberal bent (It's not much of one, but it's hard to find a media outlet that isn't slightly liberal) has no major liberal crusaders. Conservative "crusaders," or more accurately "psychoes" are a dime a dozen; Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, so on and so on... pretty much all the liberals have in terms of pychopathic demagoguery is Michael Moore, now that noone takes Gore Vidal seriously anymore.

That, and it's good to see that there's at least someone carrying on the Limbaughian Tradition. Moore keeps his facts well-defended. It's just the linkage of them that makes no rational sense. As Rush could link a person against censoring books to being a pornography supporter, so too can Moore take anyone against him personally and link them to any number of the bible-belt-spawned idiots who hate him for the very good reason that he's stolen their technique.

(I'll save people some trouble on the hypocrisy front: Moore's railed against the fat-cat policy of having private schools for the haves, and public schools for the have-nots, but sends his kids to private schools. He accuses the right wing of editing information in order to push their propaganda, and at the same time is guilty of using outrageous exxagurations to help his points. He repeatedly refers to the Bush Administration in the most insulting terms possible, and dismisses any personal attacks on himself as being pitiful attempts.)

(I'll save people some trouble on the hypocrisy front: Moore's railed against the fat-cat policy of having private schools for the haves, and public schools for the have-nots, but sends his kids to private schools. He accuses the right wing of editing information in order to push their propaganda, and at the same time is guilty of using outrageous exxagurations to help his points. He repeatedly refers to the Bush Administration in the most insulting terms possible, and dismisses any personal attacks on himself as being pitiful attempts.)I don't quite know where I stand on private education, but its gotta be said that public education sucks pretty bad. I certainly don't blame Moore for having his kids educated privately, but I think (and I'm sure he does too) that by far the best solution would be to properly fund public schools. Also, I think it would be wrong, I think it would be the most cowardly, unjust and selfish thing if he insisted on having his kids educated to a lower standard just to satisfy his politics. That would just be... insane.

I don't know why people want to seethis movie. It is a documentry. I go to the movies to be entertained not to be bored out of my skull. Seriously the movies are a way to take us away from reality not scare the crap out of us. If your going to see the movies see something like Rush hour or bad santa not some mind numbingly boring documentry. zBesides it is probably going to be about moore ranting and raving and whinning about the president.

I don't know why people want to seethis movie. It is a documentry. I go to the movies to be entertained not to be bored out of my skull. Seriously the movies are a way to take us away from reality not scare the crap out of us. If your going to see the movies see something like Rush hour or bad santa not some mind numbingly boring documentry. zBesides it is probably going to be about moore ranting and raving and whinning about the president.

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

You would have been correct if you subsituted MOORE for US. Soldiers, Marines, airmen/women, and seamen. Remember they are the ones willing to sacrifce their life's blood for this country. Something that fat tub MOORE i doubt is willing to do...Remember that please.Yeah, cos Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush and the rest are all really patriotic and served their country. :roll:


anyway, the military is just a bunch of people following orders (and war is not a nobel undertaking in my eyes). Moore actually believes in changing things the right way... using his mind.

To all of those who stated openly that they disagreed with Moore's politics, but refused to attack his patriotism or motives: You're a credit to true conservatism as I understand it (If your belief system is other than that, forgive the assumption).

the "freedom loving" rightwing is using some corporate front group called MoveForward America to blackmail and threaten movie theatres to censor this movie--these are the same rightys who accuse Moore of being anti-american?

Caps-boy, I need a good laugh. Explain how a group saying "It's nothing but leftist propaganda" about a movie that is, in fact, pretty much nothing but leftist propaganda, is against the free speech laws that Moore enjoys the protection of.

Feel free to throw in a couple of lines about being a fat-cat nazi, too.

are you asking how groups that are pushing to keep a movie out of theaters are against free speech?

Comparing the government's actions following 9/11 to Fahrenheit 451 is utterly absurd. It shows how much Moore exaggerates and propogates half-truths (if truths at all).

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.
Can you explain why you think Michael Moore hates America?

Er, are you actually asking FoB for an explanation that requires more than mouth-frothing rhetoric? Dude, if you are, get a soda or something, because that's gonna take awhile.
Well I am going to give my son a ride to the theater...will that be enough time? 8)

Probably not unless the theater is in Bangladesh or something. :D

Let's just assume for a second that EVERY fact displayed in Farenheit 9/11 is true (unlikely). It is also true that it would it be impossible to include all the facts of these issues, and it is almost certain that Moore left many things on the cutting room floor that didn't fit his documentaries "message". This means that the display of the actual truth in the film is not going to happen. I respect Michael Moore's right to express his opinion, even if I do disagree with many of his statements.

Please remember that if you plan to see this movie it is "not" the full truth. The same goes for the entire media and politics. Take into consideration that whatever you see in all of media is at best only part true, and at worst pure opinion. If, as I suspect, Moore is trying to at least imply this film as the truth then he is doing a disservice to us all.

If, as I suspect, Moore is trying to at least imply this film as the truth then he is doing a disservice to us all.

Well, not exactly. Perhaps it's not the whole truth and there will certainly be a lot of rhetoric mixed in there, but it represents part of the truth. Moore's films must be taken for what they are, documentaries. Like Incertonia said, a documentary is not journalisim. It's biased in it's account. Moore's film will undoubtedly be biased, just as the documentary being made about him is biased as well. Documentarians, by their specific action of making a documentary, do not present an whole accounting of the facts, merely their take on the situation. Moore's film will certainly have truth in it, but it will be a slanted truth undoubtedly. That doesn't make it any less true. Hopefully it'll inspire people to question both his take on the situation and the Bush Administration's response and actions and go out and find their own answers.

The problem with this film, however, is not so much what is says, but the fact that it almost didn't get a chance to say it at all. Additionally, the attacks so far have not been on the film itself or what it offers, but on Moore's "patriotisim" or "Americanisim" or on him. While he is a public figure and has therefore left himself open to a certain level of public criticisim, the effort by some to discount the film before it's even seen, not on the quality of it's research, but upon the insideous implication that it's creator "hates America" because he is exercising a right granted to him by the Constitution is deplorable and, ultimately, just as "unAmerican" as his detractors claim him to be.

Definately not going to see it.... Well, let me rephrase that. I'm not going to pay money to see it. Just like Moore's Bowling for Columbine, this movie is going to be a bunch of staged scenes and butchered quotes all meant to press his liberal propaganda.
Now don't get me wrong! He has the perfect right to say it, and I don't want to censure him or anything. I'm just not going to promote his views by giving him money.
If a friend buys the movie, or I have some other chance to see it without forking over cash I'll see it. But until then, nope.

I agrre with the first part about propaganda, misquotes etc. But in many respects he is very correct about alot of things. He just has a funny way of showwing it.

Perhaps I misphrased. Some, or all of the views expressed in the film may have truth. But what I wanted to remind people of is that it is not the only or absolute truth and that they should look at other sources, as well as this movie if they choose, to at least try and come up with their own objective decision.

I agree that Moore's portrayal as Anti-American is wrong. I see him as more of an anti-conservative/ultra-liberal but thats beside the point. His detractors have just as much right to detract Moore's film as he has to say what he wants. Both sides are entitled to their opinions but I think we should only judge after seeing the film and checking the facts.

What irked me on this topic was that some people I know have the impression that everything in this movie will be completely true. I just wanted to emphasize that this film will not be a perfect truth, created by a fallible human being.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

He has his right to express himself., Not everyone will blindly follow him or the moron who uddered, "Your either with us or with the terrorists" Last time I checked the Patriot Act did not repeal all our freedom of speech.

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

You would have been correct if you subsituted MOORE for US. Soldiers, Marines, airmen/women, and seamen. Remember they are the ones willing to sacrifce their life's blood for this country. Something that fat tub MOORE i doubt is willing to do...Remember that please.Yeah, cos Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush and the rest are all really patriotic and served their country. :roll:

Yes they serve their country, the Fourth Reich!

See Mike Wilsons film he is unbiased or go to Moorewatch.com, to see the truth behind the filmaker.

See Mike Wilsons film he is unbiased or go to Moorewatch.com, to see the truth behind the filmaker.

Checked out the website. It seems to be written by a "potty-mouth" with limited intelligence. It is nothing but a bragging board for hatespeech against Moore and liberals in general. Try finding a site that can quote credible and researchable facts, not just the conjectures of a raving right winger.

Moorewatch.com has facts unlike Moore look at BFC full of lies and check out the forum and ask for facts they will deliver I gaurauntee.

He is in no way, shape, or form "Anti-American". One can dissent with views expounded by the current administration and still be patriotic.

No, I'm, pretty damn sure the man is Anti-American. When directly asked what he thinks about America he replied "I like America...somewhat."
He has also been known to say things like "Should people as ignorrant as these lead the world?" Face it, he's just after proving his own point and making a profit.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.maybe if you knew ANYTHING about american history at all youd know that France saved America during Revolutionary wartimes and was instrumental in freeing america from British tyranny--try turning off your foxnews lies and tuning into reality for once

Yeah, we all know that the Fox Network frequently distorts the happenings of the Revolutionary War. That's about all I got to say on that matter...
I do think that Michael Moore likes to spin things to his advantage. It's a trick that any good politician would use.

Let me just point this out to you. Michael Moore doesn't just edit film clips to distort information, he doesn't just put a spin on thngs, he doesn't just act hypocritically. He FLAT OUT LIES ON A REGULAR BASIS. He makes up statistics and completely fabricated an interview in his book, offenses that in the academic world would be considered unforgiveable, but apparently can slide with the media.

Simply put, Michael Moore is a fat, far left-wing, egotistical, hypocritical, slightly incoherent, and lying idiot. It's best to ignore him.

Simply put, Michael Moore is a fat, far left-wing, egotistical, hypocritical, slightly incoherent, and lying idiot. It's best to ignore him.

http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~jeff/earthgifs/world.gif

To my certain knowledge there are many fat, far right-wing, egotistical, hypocritical, incoherent, lying idiots too. I would have thought that calling a man names is not going to be conducive to any discussion about his film, or his politics. You're just being childish. I'm proud to say that several times a month we have hour-long documenteries on British TV highlighting the excesses of the left and the right. We've also had many films that are left or right slating the government of the day. Perhaps our democracy is more mature than yours. We watch them, whatever our political leanings and are that much healthier and better informed that some of the people who've posted here.

He is in no way, shape, or form "Anti-American". One can dissent with views expounded by the current administration and still be patriotic.

No, I'm, pretty damn sure the man is Anti-American. When directly asked what he thinks about America he replied "I like America...somewhat."
He has also been known to say things like "Should people as ignorrant as these lead the world?" Face it, he's just after proving his own point and making a profit.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.maybe if you knew ANYTHING about american history at all youd know that France saved America during Revolutionary wartimes and was instrumental in freeing america from British tyranny--try turning off your foxnews lies and tuning into reality for once

Yeah, we all know that the Fox Network frequently distorts the happenings of the Revolutionary War. That's about all I got to say on that matter...
I do think that Michael Moore likes to spin things to his advantage. It's a trick that any good politician would use.

Let me just point this out to you. Michael Moore doesn't just edit film clips to distort information, he doesn't just put a spin on thngs, he doesn't just act hypocritically. He FLAT OUT LIES ON A REGULAR BASIS. He makes up statistics and completely fabricated an interview in his book, offenses that in the academic world would be considered unforgiveable, but apparently can slide with the media.

Simply put, Michael Moore is a fat, far left-wing, egotistical, hypocritical, slightly incoherent, and lying idiot. It's best to ignore him.


BRAVO! You are a truley intelligent person, which is rare here.

I laid out my reasons for thinking Moore in that light, and evidence to back it up. I was merely trying to recap the salient points of my post at the very end. Also, I am in disdain of far rights just as much. I suppose I should have put "extreme" there instead of "Far left". If someone started a thread about die hard christian fundamentalists, I would be just as critical of them, and I hate Bill O'reilly with his unquestioning defense of Bush. I like Bush, but I expect even a journalist on Fox to criticize him sometimes.

I laid out my reasons for thinking Moore in that light, and evidence to back it up. I was merely trying to recap the salient points of my post at the very end. Also, I am in disdain of far rights just as much. I suppose I should have put "extreme" there instead of "Far left". If someone started a thread about die hard christian fundamentalists, I would be just as critical of them, and I hate Bill O'reilly with his unquestioning defense of Bush. I like Bush, but I expect even a journalist on Fox to criticize him sometimes.


O'Reilly can't go 3 days without bashing Bush, He is so bad some Conservatives say he is leading that bandwagon.

I hear that showings in the US have been limited to only 500 Theaters accross the entire country?!.

There is a reason.

June 17, 2004

Friends,

We're a week away from the nationwide opening of "Fahrenheit 9/11" and not a day goes by where we don't have some new battle to fight thanks to those who are still working overtime to keep people from seeing this film. What's their problem? Are they worried about something?

A Republican PR firm has formed a fake grassroots front group called "Move America Forward" to harass and intimidate theater owners into not showing "Fahrenheit 9/11." These are the same people who successfully badgered CBS into canceling the Reagan mini-series a few months ago. And they are spending a ton of money this week to threaten movie theaters who even think about showing our movie.

As of this morning, a little over 500 theaters have agreed to show the movie beginning next Friday, June 25. There are three national/regional theater chains who, as of today, have not booked the movie in their theaters. One theater owner in Illinois has reported receiving death threats.

The right wing usually wins these battles. Their basic belief system is built on censorship, repression, and keeping people ignorant. They want to limit or snuff out any debate or dissension. They also don't like pets and are mean to small children. Too many of them are named "Fred."

This new nut group is the Right's last hope in limiting how many people can see this movie. All of their other efforts have failed. Let's recap:

1. Roger Friedman at FOX News reported that the head of the company which first agreed to fund our film “got calls from Republican friends” pressuring them to back out. And they did. But... Miramax immediately picked up the film! Except...

2. Michael Eisner, the chairman of Disney, then blocked Miramax (a company owned by Disney) from releasing the film once it was finished. But... public attention and embarrassment forced Disney to let the Weinstein brothers of Miramax find another distributor! But...



3. Instead of a new distributor stepping right in -- as all the media predicted would happen -- it took another month to find distributors who would take on this movie. A number of other distributors, thanks to various pressures, were afraid to get involved. It looked for a while that we would be distributing this ourselves. But then Lions Gate and IFC Films rode in to the rescue!

So, we have beaten back all attempts to kill this movie, and the only thing in the way of you now seeing "Fahrenheit 9/11" is this Republican big-money front group trying to force theaters not to show the movie.

Please, contact your local theaters and let them know you want to see "Fahrenheit 9/11." Tell them that some people don't know that this is America and that we believe in freedom of speech and the importance of ALL voices being heard. (The members of MoveOn.org—an ACTUAL grassroots organization—have done a very cool thing. They are pledging to send a message to theater owners and are planning to attend a showing of the film on its opening weekend.)

I appreciate their efforts, but you don’t have to be a member of MoveOn to help stop this effort to keep “Fahrenheit 9/11” from making it to screens across the country. If a theater in your area is planning to show the film, just give them a call and thank them for standing up for the freedom of speech. If your local theater isn't showing the film, call them and let them know that you would like to see it and you'd like them to show it.

The White House and their minions in our media have presented one distorted version of the truth after another for the past four years. All we are asking for is the right to show what they HAVEN'T shown us, the real truth. The truth that ain't pretty (and is, sadly, damningly hilarious).

On top of all this, the MPAA gave the film an "R" rating. I want all teenagers to see this film. There is nothing in the film in terms of violence that we didn't see on TV every night at the dinner hour during the Vietnam War. Of course, that's the point, isn't it? The media have given the real footage from Iraq a "cleansing" -- made it look nice, easy to digest. Mario Cuomo has offered to be our lawyer in appealing this ruling by the MPAA. Frankly, I would like to think the MPAA is saying that the actions by the Bush administration are so abhorrent and revolting, we need to protect our children from seeing what they have done. In that case, the film should be rated NC-17!

However it turns out, I trust all of you teenagers out there will find your way into a theater to see this movie. If the government believes it is OK to send slightly older teenagers to their deaths in Iraq, I think at the very least you should be allowed to see what they are going to draft you for in a couple of years.

Finally, some very sophisticated individuals have been hacking into and shutting down our website. It is an hourly fight to keep it up. We are going to find out who is doing this and we are going to pursue a criminal prosecution. I'm preparing lots of cool stuff for the site so watch for new items on it next week (www.fahrenheit911.com and www.michaelmoore.com).

Thanks again for your support and I hope to see you at the movies on opening night, June 25.

Yours,

Michael Moore


PS. I am sponsoring a number of benefits around the country next week for local and national peace and justice groups, including Military Families Speak Out and September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. Please check your local papers and my website next week for further details.

PPS. Also, I am going to be on the “Late Show with David Letterman” on Friday night. It's on CBS at 11:35 PM Eastern and Pacific. And on Monday morning (June 21) I will be on “The Today Show” on NBC. Next week, Jon Stewart and Conan. I'd go on O'Reilly but, like a coward, he walked out on a screening we invited him to (with Al Franken just a few rows away!). I personally caught him sneaking out. Embarrassed, he tried to change the subject. He said, "When are you coming on my show?" and I said, "Turn around and watch the rest of the movie and I will come on your show." He walked out. Fair and balanced.

Think it should help.

Patriotic americans must fight rightwing nazis attempts to censor this movie at all costs

The land of free speach and democracy?

Or the land of witch hunts and bigotry?

No don't take offence, every country has problems. I just find it hard to accept that America (sweeping generalisation here) who go on about how free the country is and how they are a beacon to the world, yet they will not accept certain political views and repress those too far from the 'norm'.

It may just be that the repression of political views is more open in the US that other countries, in which case it may be better to know it is going on than be chuntering along thinking all is well.

Just a thought.

Patriotic americans must fight rightwing nazis attempts to censor this movie at all costs

If you are going to make a film that you wish to inform the public about the wrongs in the current Bush Administration, you show them ALL sides of the argument; anything else is pure propaganda.

I have no problem with Michael Moore and I have seen Bowling for Columbine. It was a rather good movie, which made a few good points, but his methods I look down upon. It would like me taking someones post, and I will quote one randomly here:

I laid out my reasons for thinking Moore in that light, and evidence to back it up. I was merely trying to recap the salient points of my post at the very end. Also, I am in disdain of far rights just as much. I suppose I should have put "extreme" there instead of "Far left". If someone started a thread about die hard christian fundamentalists, I would be just as critical of them, and I hate Bill O'reilly with his unquestioning defense of Bush. I like Bush, but I expect even a journalist on Fox to criticize him sometimes.

Now let me apply my Michael Moore strategy:

I am disdain and I hate Fox

Now I used the exact same words, but deleted what I did not like.

If you have the facts to back up your claims that Moore is a liar, then bring them on. Otherwise, you should shut up because you are just discrediting yourselves and not worth listening to.

I find it sad that people here keep making demeaning comments about Moore's weight. It's childish and vindictive.

I think I am going to start taking a tally of trolls and their comments when I get some time.

anyone else notice the huge influx of mainly far-right trolls recently?

dp

I find it really pathetic that the right is not above attacking soemone personally because tehy dont like what he has to say.

Typical republican:
"Moore is a fat unamerican traitor. Why? Becuase I like George Bush. Why? cause ima republican. Why? Im a republican because I like George Bush. Now get those facts away from me, youll mess up my hair! Anyone who raises any questions about the direction the country is heading is a terrorist who hates freedom and want to kill us all because we're free and the're muslim. Everything is black and white, good and evil, there is no possible justification for anyone to hate America, so they must all be evil frenchmen. It has nothing to do with our military propping up the repressive Saudi monarchy or our imperialist wars, its because they don't like freedom fries with their Falafel, and they dont think we should get them either. They are minons of the devil set out to destroy all that is right and good in the world."

Seriously, isn't this "we're good, the're evil" logic getting embarassing? When is anything that simple? I challenge the Bushites to give me a single example of an "evil" person.
Aren't the real conservatives beginning to worry about the limb the Republicans are dragging them out on?
Does anyone else find this posturing pathetic?

I've read several statements that refer to this movie as one sided propaganda. I fail to see the difference. Bush and his cronies have been selling their one sided propaganda since the election of 2000. Remember, you are either with us or with the terrorists. Some of us knew you could combat terrorism without stepping on the constitution(i.e. the patriot act). I find Micheal Moore's response a natural evolutionary progression in a government and right wing based on oppression and character assasination.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.maybe if you knew ANYTHING about american history at all youd know that France saved America during Revolutionary wartimes and was instrumental in freeing america from British tyranny--try turning off your foxnews lies and tuning into reality for once

Well now France hates America after America saved them in WW1 and WW2. Moore is anti-American.

A lengthy dissection of Fairenheit 9/11 by Christopher Hitchens:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Ummm Stirner? It's hardly fair to call Hitchens' screed against Moore a dissection, since he doesn't disprove a single contention the film makes, nor does he really discredit the basis of the film. Hitchens sets up inaccurate straw man after straw man and then proceeds to barely tip them over, all the while making personal attacks against Moore the person.

Let me make this very salient point--I think Moore is an asshole as a person. He's pompous and has far too high an opinion of himself and is occasionally hypocritical in his personal behavior. He's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is and I'd probably get into a screaming argument with him over a beer.

But that doesn't mean anything in regards to this film. The film stands or falls on its own as far as accuracy is concerned, and thus far, no one has been able to question its factual accuracy in the slightest. Everyone--and I do mean everyone who has attacked this film has done so by attacking Moore, and that's bullshit, plain and simple.

Fine, but it's not a documentary. Moore's work is pure spin. He is a master of propaganda. It's an artform. You can selectively take (true) facts while disregarding evidence that hurts your agenda, put in sinister music at the right time, get all the tear-jerker shots, remove all context.

That's not the work of a documentary film maker any more than Leni Riefenstahl's was.

Equating Moore with Reifenstahl is a bullshit cheap shot and it's below even Hitchens. Reifenstahl defended the Nazi regime. Moore--even at his very worst--is nowhere near that league.

And documentary is by its very nature biased. It's not journalism--it's a subjective telling of a story using fact to make the point you want to make.

And what "evidence" is Moore disregarding? Thus far, no one has made any reference to anything that's been taken out of context either. Quit making charges you can't back up.

Equating Moore with Reifenstahl is a bullshit cheap shot and it's below even Hitchens. Reifenstahl defended the Nazi regime. Moore--even at his very worst--is nowhere near that league.
Maybe not in talent. Moore has made it his life mission not to promote a regime, but to destroy. Some people know when they are being manipulated.
And documentary is by its very nature biased. It's not journalism--it's a subjective telling of a story using fact to make the point you want to make.
This is not true. Until Moore came along documentaries were about getting to the factual essence of something. It used to be about observation. It wasn't about participating and moralizing.

And what "evidence" is Moore disregarding? Thus far, no one has made any reference to anything that's been taken out of context either. Quit making charges you can't back up.
Well I refuse to fund Moore by paying for the movie so you'll have to wait until I can burn a DVD copy before I can comment. Still, any film purporting to be about Bush and 9/11 would surely show Bush at Ground Zero rallying the rescuers, right? Or was that cut to make room for extended weeping?

You can read about the Ground Zero visit here (http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/09/14/bushnyc_010914). It was one of the most inspirational things I've seen. It was raw and unscripted, unlike say Michael Moore's "free gun" bank set-up scene in Bowling for Columbine.

The Realplayer clip (with crappy video) is here (http://www.cbc.ca/clips/ram-newsworld/bush_mega010914.ram).

He put his arm around a firefighter as he spoke to the crowd. When some people shouted that they couldn't hear him, Bush responded with assurances: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon."

These threads really are useless though. You hate Bush, you hate that people want to own unregistered firearms, you hate that people don't buy into the welfare state, etc (I don't know what your particular issues are except "Bush Sucks").

Nothing I or anyone else could conceivably say will change your mind on these issues. At best we can make you angry and watch you combust in an entertaining fashion. This is a fun thing to do, but it isn't serious debate.

Michael Moore is the guy who feeds your vision of how the world is. So you adore him and he reinforces your opinions. Then you demand more from him and he comes up with even crazier manipulative documentaries, which push your opinions further out in a cycle.

But some of us aren't along for the ride and watch with amusement or frustration (depending on our temperment) as the cycle of lies continues.

But that doesn't mean anything in regards to this film. The film stands or falls on its own as far as accuracy is concerned, and thus far, no one has been able to question its factual accuracy in the slightest. Everyone--and I do mean everyone who has attacked this film has done so by attacking Moore, and that's bullshit, plain and simple.


Really only one reason for this. The film hasn't been out long enough for anyone to thoroughly analyze its accuracy, or lack thereof; whichever the case may be.

Equating Moore with Reifenstahl is a bullshit cheap shot and it's below even Hitchens. Reifenstahl defended the Nazi regime. Moore--even at his very worst--is nowhere near that league.
Maybe not in talent. Moore has made it his life mission not to promote a regime, but to destroy. Some people know when they are being manipulated.

Sorry, but it's a bullshit tactic to compare someone--anyone--to the Nazi regime under Hitler. Bush supporters got their panties in a twist--and rightly so--over the ads people sent in to the Moveon contest comparing Bush to Hitler. So why is it okay to compare Moore to a Nazi apologist? It isn't.

And documentary is by its very nature biased. It's not journalism--it's a subjective telling of a story using fact to make the point you want to make.
This is not true. Until Moore came along documentaries were about getting to the factual essence of something. It used to be about observation. It wasn't about participating and moralizing.

You might want to ask movie critics and people who have written extenisvely about film that question. Thus far, the vast majority of film critics who have been hammered by the right for recommending this film have defended it by making the same argument I did--that documentary is by its very nature subjective, not objective. Both Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper have written extensively on that in just the last coupleo f weeks.

And what "evidence" is Moore disregarding? Thus far, no one has made any reference to anything that's been taken out of context either. Quit making charges you can't back up.
Well I refuse to fund Moore by paying for the movie so you'll have to wait until I can burn a DVD copy before I can comment. Still, any film purporting to be about Bush and 9/11 would surely show Bush at Ground Zero rallying the rescuers, right? Or was that cut to make room for extended weeping?

You can read about the Ground Zero visit here (http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/09/14/bushnyc_010914). It was one of the most inspirational things I've seen. It was raw and unscripted, unlike say Michael Moore's "free gun" bank set-up scene in Bowling for Columbine.

The Realplayer clip (with crappy video) is here (http://www.cbc.ca/clips/ram-newsworld/bush_mega010914.ram).

He put his arm around a firefighter as he spoke to the crowd. When some people shouted that they couldn't hear him, Bush responded with assurances: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." I saw the Ground Zero visit when it happened, so I don't need to watch it again. But as to why Moore left that sort of stuff out of the movie, here's a possibility--for the last 3 years, the news media has done a pretty good job of putting that story out, that Bush was heroic on 9/11 and right after, that he pulled the country together, etc. Everyone has seen that side of the story, again and again and again. So it's time to see the stuff that wasn't reported--Bush reading to the children while the WTC was under attack, etc.

And documentary is by its very nature biased. It's not journalism--it's a subjective telling of a story using fact to make the point you want to make.
This is not true. Until Moore came along documentaries were about getting to the factual essence of something. It used to be about observation. It wasn't about participating and moralizing.

You might want to ask movie critics and people who have written extenisvely about film that question. Thus far, the vast majority of film critics who have been hammered by the right for recommending this film have defended it by making the same argument I did--that documentary is by its very nature subjective, not objective. Both Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper have written extensively on that in just the last coupleo f weeks.

As a documentarian and film graduate (woo hoo, I can say that now) I can back this up. This line specifically:
It wasn't about participating and moralizing.
Not even close. The whole bit about observation:That was a nuevo art notion of the sixties that was more or less short lived, dubed Cinema Verte or Direct Cinema, depending on who you talked to. A prime example of that would be Salesmen. While some people still use this asthetic (and the asthetic is used to lend 'reality' to unreal situations such as The Real World or The Blair Witch Project) the movement itself fell apart due to the practicers realisation that thier ideal was inherently false. They chose where to aim the camera, when to cut, what to add. There is no way to remove the film maker from the film. Plain observation was a fantasy.

Furthermore, every-EVERY documentary is made from a thesis, an argument the filmmaker wants to make. To say this is Moore's contribution is to say that you have no understanding of the form. Moore's contribution is to popularise the personality driven documentary, with the filmmaker as personality in the film. He didn't invent it, he popularized it. (re:Super Size Me) Other documentaries don't neccisarily follow that (The Corporation has no onscreen narrator and Control Room has no narrator at all yet focuses on a select few people in the overall group. Both are great documentaries, for those looking to bide thier time until Friday. Oddly enough I haven't seen Super Size Me. Maybe because I ate nothing but fast food for like five years and don't want to know how bad that was.)

Definately not going to see it.... Well, let me rephrase that. I'm not going to pay money to see it. Just like Moore's Bowling for Columbine, this movie is going to be a bunch of staged scenes and butchered quotes all meant to press his liberal propaganda.
Now don't get me wrong! He has the perfect right to say it, and I don't want to censure him or anything. I'm just not going to promote his views by giving him money.
If a friend buys the movie, or I have some other chance to see it without forking over cash I'll see it. But until then, nope.

Support piracy - buy a bootleg.

SHL

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
http://www.webcases.com/m3073.jpg
This troll wears a skirt to hide his complete lack of testicles.

Hmm . . . Being that your post is flaming/trolling can we assume that is a self portrait of a flaming troll?

SHL

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
here, here any one who sits there and says that the bush administration blundered every thing is a dumb a** and looking for troulbe. :x

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
here, here any one who sits there and says that the bush administration blundered every thing is a dumb a** and looking for troulbe. :xBush Sucks on every level

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.
here, here any one who sits there and says that the bush administration blundered every thing is a dumb a** and looking for troulbe. :xBush Sucks on every level

You know, the funniest thing to me, are those righties, who automatically bash this movie, with out even having seen it.

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.
Newsflash:

You can't accurately judge a movie if it feeds and reinforces your dementia.

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

That's pretty un-American of you. I am no great fan of moore's, but he is entitled to express his view point. America has great ideals but in many ways it is falling short of them. To point this out is not lacking patriotism but is the essence of it.

Thomas Jefferson was not being un-American when he allowed that the populace has a right to speak out and, if necessary, act out to remove injustice. That was the basis for the American Revolution against England.

Many feel that the current president and the people he represents are doing serious harm to our republic. It is their duty to speak out and to try to effect change. Moore is not talking armed revolt - although that may be a legitimate option at some point - he is trying to effect peaceful change to his vision of America through the Democratic process. That is the American way.

Exclusion and disaffection of entire groups of people is not at all the American ideal. This is more along the lines of a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator with stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship. Typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. In short, the literal definition of fascism (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=fascism).

SHL

i have to agree with The Wick, it is the soldiers, airmen, navy, and everyone listed in the military who are the most patriotic in America. You have to agree with me, because who is more patriotic? Someone who will serve their country without questioning why and march to their death, or someone who sits back, and makes films criticizing america? ( dont get me wrong, i kinda see moore's point)

i have to agree with The Wick, it is the soldiers, airmen, navy, and everyone listed in the military who are the most patriotic in America. You have to agree with me, because who is more patriotic? Someone who will serve their country without questioning why and march to their death, or someone who sits back, and makes films criticizing america? ( dont get me wrong, i kinda see moore's point)

Such blatant symbols of patriotism are the stuff of grade school children's imaginations. While it is true many young people join the armed forces motivated purely by their love of country and a sense of duty, it is equally true that many join in for the benefits that veterans enjoy such as educational, job preference, etc. all the while keepingtheir fingers crossed they will be behind the lines of any real action.

Why do you consider it less a love of country to pour yourself into the political arena and fight for what you believe to be best? I am not just talking MM here. I am talking about some who devote their energies to serving their country in other, perhaps more significant ways.

SHL

You know, the funniest thing to me, are those righties, who automatically bash this movie, with out even having seen it.

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.

No, but since everyones been making the point about how "Documentaries are biased by nature" I think it's my turn to use it.

It is moore's creation, and I find Moore's artistic talent reminiscent of people who vomit on canvas and ask for a check. He edits stuff out to push his own agenda. We know he has done it, we know it has a feirce tendency to do it, and we are confident in his ability to do it again. (I don't know who 'we' is either, but whatever...). If I'm going to see a movie, I wish it to be done well. I'm not going to watch someone interveiw 10 black people who all happen to like fried chicken, and claim "I HAVE PROOF!" Odd, since they didn't show the footage of the black people who despise fried chicken.

I know the claim about fried chicken is wrong since the foundation of it is faulty, just as most of Moore's work is. He attempts to prove something while he has complete manipulation over the evidence.

I dare you all to find proof of Moore not giving just facts, and actually lying.

I await your discussion on this. (http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/004/127ujhuf.asp)

i have to agree with The Wick, it is the soldiers, airmen, navy, and everyone listed in the military who are the most patriotic in America. You have to agree with me, because who is more patriotic? Someone who will serve their country without questioning why and march to their death, or someone who sits back, and makes films criticizing america? ( dont get me wrong, i kinda see moore's point)

How about the people who risk their everyday safety in order to speak out against injustices they see occuring in their country. Who put their lives and well-being on the line to say what needs to be said, even if it isn't popular? I'm not sure Michael Moore qualifies in this, except the man is getting death threats for a movie that many have labeled either a pack of lies or completely irrelevant.

Don't get me wrong, either, I think the military are worthy of honor and respect, but I don't think that just because they might be willing to follow orders blindly that makes them more "patriotic" or more "American". Why are you attempting to breed a "warrior culture" that is in direct opposition to the country envisioned by our founding fathers?

You know, the funniest thing to me, are those righties, who automatically bash this movie, with out even having seen it.

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.

No, but since everyones been making the point about how "Documentaries are biased by nature" I think it's my turn to use it.

It is moore's creation, and I find Moore's artistic talent reminiscent of people who vomit on canvas and ask for a check. He edits stuff out to push his own agenda. We know he has done it, we know it has a feirce tendency to do it, and we are confident in his ability to do it again. (I don't know who 'we' is either, but whatever...). If I'm going to see a movie, I wish it to be done well. I'm not going to watch someone interveiw 10 black people who all happen to like fried chicken, and claim "I HAVE PROOF!" Odd, since they didn't show the footage of the black people who despise fried chicken.

I know the claim about fried chicken is wrong since the foundation of it is faulty, just as most of Moore's work is. He attempts to prove something while he has complete manipulation over the evidence.

I dare you all to find proof of Moore not giving just facts, and actually lying.

I await your discussion on this. (http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/004/127ujhuf.asp)

Well, here is Michael Moore's comment on it (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=19)

Seems that interview was reported on previously and Barnes never complained. Now call me crazy, but when people interview you - there is a natural tendancy to seek out the article to find out how you did.

Maybe Barnes really never did hear about this article and position that has been reported for years until now. But I personally have to call this one a wash with neither side having a convincing proof as to whether the conversation occured as reported verbatim.

However I lean towards Moore as I find it astounding that this story cold have been reported three time - twice in major venues - over 16 years and nobody ever brought it to Barnes attention until just now.

-Z-

So, has anybody seen Mike Moore's new film, or have any thoughts on it?

Don't you mean TRA/MKULTRA's new film? :lol:

For those of you who forget there was a big hype over who this player was. Some claimed him to be michael moore

Why waste your time sitting thru two hours of Micheal moore hatting America, with redical left-wing nutjobs cheering and spewing their anti-america lies. Not my idea of 8 bucks well spent.
Can you explain why you think Michael Moore hates America?

Michael Moore -

"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush? You closed down a friggin' weekly newspaper, you great giver of freedom and democracy! Then all hell broke loose. The paper only had 10,000 readers! Why are you smirking?"

"I agree with the National Rifle Association when they say, 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Except I would alter that to say, 'Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.' We're the only country that does this, and we do it on an personal level in our neighborhoods and within our families and our schools, and we do it on a global level. The American attitude is that we believe we have a right to just go in and bomb another country. This is where Bush is going right now, right?"

Moore claimed, during an interview on Costas' show, that the Bush administration "absolutely" knows where Osama bin Laden is located and doesn't go after him "because he's funded by their friends in Saudi Arabia!"

"They [Americans] are possibly the dumbest people on the planet ... in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug pricks,” he replied. “We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don’t know about anything that’s happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing.”


There is much more.

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.
Newsflash:

You can't accurately judge a movie if it feeds and reinforces your dementia.

Sooo Stirner...how are you suposed to judge this movie...or any movie?

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.
Newsflash:

You can't accurately judge a movie if it feeds and reinforces your dementia.

Sooo Stirner...how are you suposed to judge this movie...or any movie?
http://www.lunabean.com/dancing_spiderman.gif

Oh surely you know right-wing nutters don't have to. They make up what can loosely be called their minds and stick to it, whether the proof shows them wrong or not. It's the Republican strength.

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2003/trall030303.gif

Newsflash:

You cant accurately judge a movie if you dont see it.
Newsflash:

You can't accurately judge a movie if it feeds and reinforces your dementia.

Sooo Stirner...how are you suposed to judge this movie...or any movie?
http://www.lunabean.com/dancing_spiderman.gif

Oh surely you know right-wing nutters don't have to. They make up what can loosely be called their minds and stick to it, whether the proof shows them wrong or not. It's the Republican strength.


Are you honestly going to post a Ted Rall comic to lend credence to your argument. THis guy hates everyone and everything right of Michael Moore.

I am not against somebody making a documentary about Bush, but I don't want it to be the manipulative, anti-bush Mike Moore.

A film by a nuetral person would be nice, not a film by someone who will warp everything to kick dirt in George's face!


Umm, Michael Moore just shows facts in his movies. If the facts are anti-Bush, then so be it. You shouldn't withhold facts simply because they show the president in a negative light.
And of course, Bush's campaign team would NEVER try to "warp everything" to kick dirt in John Kerry's face! I mean, that "ribbon-gate", about John Kerry throwing away his Vietnam ribbons, was very worthwhile, way much more so than the failure to implant democracy in Iraq, the inablility to find WMD's, the huge corprate contributions that "president" Bush recieves, the economy, and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

No it isnt.
You dont know what your talking about.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

No it isnt.
You dont know what your talking about.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.
No, Reagan presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

Clinton presided over massive corporate ethics problems leading to artificial inflation of company worth and artificial expansion.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

No it isnt.
You dont know what your talking about.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.
No, Reagan presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

Clinton presided over massive corporate ethics problems leading to artificial inflation of company worth and artificial expansion.

Your quite mistaken.
Look at the facts.

GDP.

I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

No it isnt.
You dont know what your talking about.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.
No, Reagan presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

Clinton presided over massive corporate ethics problems leading to artificial inflation of company worth and artificial expansion.

Your quite mistaken.
Look at the facts.

GDP.
Yeah, lots of stuff got produced, by companies that couldn't actually afford to produce these things and hid this fact from everyone until it was too late and they collapsed.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.
No, Reagan presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

Clinton presided over massive corporate ethics problems leading to artificial inflation of company worth and artificial expansion.

Heh. All of the sudden "one of" turned into just one person...

fahrenheit 451 was all about censorship...
fahrenheit 9/11 is about bush censoring the facts about 9/11, and in turn bush's cronies are trying to censor moore.

from day one, bush tried to prevent the 9/11 commission from forming. then he wouldn't release documents to the commission. then he released some documents, but cut out crucial parts. then after the commission finally got him in there, he had to go with papa cheney behind closed doors.

so what if moore only presents one side of the argument and only includes video that is helpful to his cause? it's called VOICING AN OPINION! we're allowed to have those, despite the patriot act.

and what if moore distorts the facts? that's nothing new to rush, o'reilly, fox news, bush, etc.

i love moore but i'll be the first to say that he is fat, dirty, stubborn, and manipulative (when it suits his objectives). but personal attacks aren't enough justification to not see an enlightening movie. moore tries to take the high road and debate the prez's handling of 9/11 and the surrounding events, instead of relying on name calling to make his point. move america off the cliff is doing just the opposite, attacking the person instead of his points.


didn't we all learn in kindergarden that throwing a hissy fit whenever we didn't get our way is not the mature way to act?

in barnes's article, freddy even trash talks france. france saved our ass in the revolution, because we were defending ourselves. we helped france in the ww's because they were being invaded. and they decline to help attack a fairly defenseless soveriegn nation, we start renaming food and making jokes about them. hey, if it weren't for them, we wouldn't have the freedoms we claim they're against.

and someone remind me again how invading iraq is protecting our freedoms? i support the troops, i have friends over there, and they're just following orders, but an occupation neither protects our freedoms or the iraqis'.

finally, speaking out against someone who is trying to steal freedoms from you doesn't mean you are anti-freedom. it means you love the freedoms that you have and it displays pride in the system that lets you voice your opinions. free speech isn't just for "free speech zones," it's for everybody, whether gwb likes it or not.

the real reason rightwingers hijacked the corporate media was not just for propaganda purposes but also to be able to censor the political opinions and investigative journalism of their moral superiors

Well, here is Michael Moore's comment on it (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=19)

Seems that interview was reported on previously and Barnes never complained. Now call me crazy, but when people interview you - there is a natural tendancy to seek out the article to find out how you did.

Maybe Barnes really never did hear about this article and position that has been reported for years until now. But I personally have to call this one a wash with neither side having a convincing proof as to whether the conversation occured as reported verbatim.

However I lean towards Moore as I find it astounding that this story cold have been reported three time - twice in major venues - over 16 years and nobody ever brought it to Barnes attention until just now.

-Z-

Did you even read my link? The interveiw never physically happened. It never virtually happened, it never spiritually happened. It never, ever happened. How the hell was Barnes supposed to know about it and actively search for it, if it never frickin happened? And if it did happen, then wouldn't Moore have included it in his Bibliography of the book and cited it? Because he didn't.

That guy is sick Using americas worst tragedy since pearl harbor as a movie. Did you hear that he also put alot of things out of conext to make bush look like an ass? Ive seen the guy he comes to macdil and gives us Military families a thanks for our sacrifice. He doesnt have to do that but he does it any way dont see Kerry thanking our troops or us the families :?

Well, here is Michael Moore's comment on it (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=19)

Seems that interview was reported on previously and Barnes never complained. Now call me crazy, but when people interview you - there is a natural tendancy to seek out the article to find out how you did.

Maybe Barnes really never did hear about this article and position that has been reported for years until now. But I personally have to call this one a wash with neither side having a convincing proof as to whether the conversation occured as reported verbatim.

However I lean towards Moore as I find it astounding that this story cold have been reported three time - twice in major venues - over 16 years and nobody ever brought it to Barnes attention until just now.

-Z-

Did you even read my link? The interveiw never physically happened. It never virtually happened, it never spiritually happened. It never, ever happened. How the hell was Barnes supposed to know about it and actively search for it, if it never frickin happened? And if it did happen, then wouldn't Moore have included it in his Bibliography of the book and cited it? Because he didn't.Because there's absolutely no chance that Barnes is, umm, full of shit? Hmmm?

Well, here is Michael Moore's comment on it (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=19)

Seems that interview was reported on previously and Barnes never complained. Now call me crazy, but when people interview you - there is a natural tendancy to seek out the article to find out how you did.

Maybe Barnes really never did hear about this article and position that has been reported for years until now. But I personally have to call this one a wash with neither side having a convincing proof as to whether the conversation occured as reported verbatim.

However I lean towards Moore as I find it astounding that this story cold have been reported three time - twice in major venues - over 16 years and nobody ever brought it to Barnes attention until just now.

-Z-

Did you even read my link? The interveiw never physically happened. It never virtually happened, it never spiritually happened. It never, ever happened. How the hell was Barnes supposed to know about it and actively search for it, if it never frickin happened? And if it did happen, then wouldn't Moore have included it in his Bibliography of the book and cited it? Because he didn't.Because there's absolutely no chance that Barnes is, umm, full of shit? Hmmm?

By George, I think Incertonia might be on to some thing.. ;)

I think the name of the flick infers the issue of censorship on any form of self-education regarding what involves political issues, like the book. Seems pretty accurate, why not look into how long it took and what situations he has to overcome?
I've read that he intends to sue if Bush or his administration intend to invoke slander over this. I wonder if the administration will say there's some kind of dubbing involved in the ACTUAL VIDEO FOOTAGE with Bush on it, or anything that Bush or his cronies say is merely "taken out of context". Yeah, taken out of context to the extent that obviously the people blathering that phrase so much aren't even paying attention to the whole presentation, or even finishing the sentence, hence not cognitively establishing "context". Any person dealing with the blackballing that the fright wing has been heaping the last few years is understandably concerned of a large group of people being influenced by any (possibly conflagratory) information that in any way detracts from the rhetoric/diatribe/unconscious mantra.

And as to the FBI issue, remember that the commission was approached midstride by administration "advisors" as to what sort of questions should and shouldn't be asked.
If the FBI was interviewed and their information was nowhere outside the ominous genre of "national security" then you can't expect to get very far with it. Try it yourself sometime.
Also, on a cute little note, the new US-VISIT virtual borders program, rumored by the administration itself to cost anywhere from $10 mil to $10 bil ($15 bil, maybe tops!) has had its contract awarded to Accenture LLD, which is not even an United States based corporation. Brilliant bunch of bastards.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

No it isnt.
You dont know what your talking about.

Bush has presided over the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression.
Clintopn presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.
No, Reagan presided over one of the biggest periods of economic growth this country has ever seen.

Clinton presided over massive corporate ethics problems leading to artificial inflation of company worth and artificial expansion.

Reagan presided over a era of junk bonds and hostile corporate takeovers, remember Ivan Boseky. Reagan created the then largest deficit in history, only to be surpassed by the current occupant of the white house. Reagan raided social security, gutted education, attempted to destroy any form of collective bargaining, and participated in rather shady arms deals. Reagan's "trickle down economics" was just a cute term for allowing the gap to widen between the rich and everyone else. Reagan set policies in place to destroy the middle class and the current idiot in the white house plans on finishing the job.

Michael Moore hates America, hates Americans, and hates anyone who prevents him from making a profit.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Nice timing and delivery.

Commiserations for your lack of contact with reality, and with your inability to understand anyone who disagrees with you, without resorting to stereotypes and labels.

PT

You are right... what makes a person pro-American is when they love a country so much that they are willing to fight to make it a better place. And THAT is exactly what Moore is doing. He cares enough to try to make a difference.

You would have been correct if you subsituted MOORE for US. Soldiers, Marines, airmen/women, and seamen. Remember they are the ones willing to sacrifce their life's blood for this country. Something that fat tub MOORE i doubt is willing to do...Remember that please.Yeah, cos Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush and the rest are all really patriotic and served their country. :roll:


anyway, the military is just a bunch of people following orders (and war is not a nobel undertaking in my eyes). Moore actually believes in changing things the right way... using his mind.

...not to forget, Bush made sure he avoided all the real fighting during the Vietnam war -- he even played with an Air Force reserve jet from time to time, when he could bother to turn up.

PT

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.maybe if you knew ANYTHING about american history at all youd know that France saved America during Revolutionary wartimes and was instrumental in freeing america from British tyranny--try turning off your foxnews lies and tuning into reality for once

Well now France hates America after America saved them in WW1 and WW2. Moore is anti-American.

France hates America? You mean there is a nation called "France" that hates a nation called "America" here in NS, right? I've been to France so I know you aren't talking about the real world.

I didn't realize people posted In Character on the general forum.

PT

I've been to France so I know you aren't talking about the real world.
Were you there at the period of time when one fourth of them wanted Saddam Hussein to beat the Americans?

w00t! less than 9 hrs till Farenheit opens!!

tho I'd just see it for a good laugh my mom wont let me, nor will that damn board that rated the movie 'R' rather than PG-13

w00t! less than 9 hrs till Farenheit opens!!

tho I'd just see it for a good laugh my mom wont let me, nor will that damn board that rated the movie 'R' rather than PG-13Well, I'll be seeing it in right about 36 hours--6:30 p.m. PST tomorrow--and I'm taking my 14 year old daughter to see it. Maybe you can convince your mom that it's an important enough film that you should be allowed to watch it. After all, it's not like you haven't heard the word fuck before, and that's the sole reason for the rating. The violence and blood is what you could see on the news.

Well, I'll be seeing it in right about 36 hours--6:30 p.m. PST tomorrow--and I'm taking my 14 year old daughter to see it.
And mighty bored she'll be.

Ahhh, finally a movie that shows that Bush is an idiot. :D

Well, I'll be seeing it in right about 36 hours--6:30 p.m. PST tomorrow--and I'm taking my 14 year old daughter to see it.
And mighty bored she'll be.Ah--you don't know my daughter. She's excited about it, and fairly informed as far as politics are concerned.

Well, I'll be seeing it in right about 36 hours--6:30 p.m. PST tomorrow--and I'm taking my 14 year old daughter to see it.
And mighty bored she'll be.Ah--you don't know my daughter. She's excited about it, and fairly informed as far as politics are concerned.Got to indoctrinate them earlyl, otherwise they see thru the lies.

If i see michael moore on the street i would kick his fat ass. Then i would behead him so he knows how it feels....maybe then he would believe in the war on terrorism.

Am i the only conservative republican who is a member of Nation States.

and the unemployment rate which is higher than it has been in 30 years.
Funny, this is the same unemployment rate that CLinton was crowing about in '96.

Er, care to quote a source on that?

If i see michael moore on the street i would kick his fat ass. Then i would behead him so he knows how it feels....maybe then he would believe in the war on terrorism.

Am i the only conservative republican who is a member of Nation States.

HAHAHAHA

that is exactly why Conservative Republicans are WRONG for the USA. No different and no better than teh terrorists themselves, but in fact are of the same ilk.

If i see michael moore on the street i would kick his fat ass. Then i would behead him so he knows how it feels....maybe then he would believe in the war on terrorism.

Am i the only conservative republican who is a member of Nation States.


was moore against going into afghanistan? find a source that says he was, and you almost would have a logical thought process.

iraq, patriot act, prisoner abuse have nothing to do with terrorism, it's just george fulfilling his fantasies of being like daddy and getting off on having power.

Wow :shock:

With all this hatred, I am now going to have to go see the film....

I've been to France so I know you aren't talking about the real world.
Were you there at the period of time when one fourth of them wanted Saddam Hussein to beat the Americans?

Ah yes, that famous poll of an unrepresentative group of French people ... the one that produced the results that even had many French people scratching their heads. The trouble with any poll is that we can forget to ask who paid for it, how did they select their sample, and how did they phrase their questions.

The fact is that the French, in common with much of the rest of the world other than the USA, believed then and still believe that our invasion of Iraq was not connected by confirmed facts to any genuine war on terrorism or to issues related to the 9/11 attack. On that basis, many who were asked about the invasion of Iraq preferred that Iraq would be successful in turning back the invasion which they regarded as unjustified.

It's also a matter of whether the question gave them some other choice than whether an injust invasion succeeds or fails. It didn't.

The political agenda behind someone wanting to get a group of French people to answer a poll in a manner hostile to the USA would be important to consider.

And while you're at it, could you explain how a quarter of a population (even if that were an accurate result from the whole country) can be considered representative of the country, making it right to say that the whole country ("the French") holds that opinion? I suspect we could more genuinely find 25% of our country still are racists, if they could be encouraged to tell the truth. Will you tell me that this means that "America" is racist?

You really want to go to some of the rest of the world sometime, instead of just reading someone else's interpretation of foreign countries. Live there awhile, get to know the place, understand the culture and people. Then comment. It really helps.

Peace

PT

from the New York Times review of Fahrenheit 9/11...


"Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" will be properly debated on the basis of its factual claims and cinematic techniques, it should first of all be appreciated as a high-spirited and unruly exercise in democratic self-expression. Mixing sober outrage with mischievous humor and blithely trampling the boundary between documentary and demagoguery.

"What did you expect? Mr. Moore is often impolite, rarely subtle and occasionally unwise. He can be obnoxious, tendentious and maddeningly self-contradictory. He can drive even his most ardent admirers crazy.

"While his new film, awarded the top prize at the Cannes International Film Festival this year, has been likened to an op-ed column, it might more accurately be said to resemble an editorial cartoon. Mr. Moore uses archival video images, rapid-fire editing and playful musical cues to create an exaggerated, satirical likeness of his targets."

Moore is a Anti-American and should be sent to France with all the other anti-Americans. I hate moore he doesn't deserve the right to live in America.

I do beleive that the right to Free Speech is in the U.S Constitution. If not, its guranteed by other U.S legislation.

JiangGuo

I do beleive that the right to Free Speech is in the U.S Constitution. If not, its guranteed by other U.S legislation.

JiangGuo

JiangGuo, your faith in all Americans to know our Constitution is touching. And your confidence that all of us really wish to extend its protections and rights to all our citizens without prejudice or bias is also touching. Unfortunately, there are those in our country who believe that the best way to win an argument is to call one's debating opponent "unpatriotic", and if that doesn't frighten him or her into silence, to revoke his or her rights to enjoy the freedoms of citizenship altogether. Also unfortunately, this kind of person tends to be among the supporters of the current American president.

This isn't the first time America has groaned under the strain of such people. In the 1940s and '50s during the early days of the Cold War, certain leaders in our country was so frightened they created an era of suspicion and repression that came to be known as the McCarthy Era after the Senator whose mental instability helped to fuel it. It was a time when people could lose jobs and careers or their homes just because they knew the wrong people. Distant relatives and casual acquaintances qualified as suspicious associations.

During the Civil Rights movement in the '50s and '60s it was common practice to label anyone who campaigned for racial equality as "communists", allowing them to be treated as "unAmerican". Phones were tapped illegally and repressive measures against freedom of speech were officially sanctioned by some people and even in some states. Thousands were jaied for their involvement in the Civil Rights movement, and I personally knew people who were fired because their boss had been informed by "someone" that the people had donated money to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and/or the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Both organizations were non-communist and non-violent, and the SCLC was actually pacifist.

By the end of the '60s two of McCarthy's sidekicks, Richard Nixon and J Edgar Hoover, revived the repressive attitude of the McCarthy Era in a slightly scaled down version during Nixon's presidency. Official activity by government agents was at an all-time high, and the unofficial activity has still to be measured. For the first time I know of, US troops in the form of the National Guard were allowed officially to open fire on American citizens, at Kent State University. Four students died and others were wounded. Claims that students had fired first were later found to be false.

We unfortunately have that kind of person in our politics just as other nations do. And for now, such people support our president, and he sees no need to disavow their attitude or to take measures to stop them from acting out their hatred given the opportunity.

PT

Ahhh, finally a movie that shows that Bush is an idiot. :D


For this you needed a movie?

:D

PT