NationStates Jolt Archive

Clinton White House VIPs Object to 9/11 Drama (http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/clinton-white-house-vips-object-to-911/20060907105309990008?ncid=NWS00010000000001)

You know, Michael Moore arranged facts to suit his movies but far as I know he never outright made shit up like wholesome family entertainment company Disney did for this 9-11 drama.

No surprise if it's going to be timed for a November release to try and numb the American public's mind with "9/11-9/11-Terrorist-Terrorist-Freedom-Freedom" for the Congressional races and help uplift Dear Leader's regime.

Of course it's pretty much slander against the Clinton Administration so loyal Busheviks will praise this film just as much as they all villified "Death of a President."

As Jim Nabors used to say, "Surpryse, Surpryse, Surpryse..."

You know, Michael Moore arranged facts to suit his movies but far as I know he never outright made shit up like wholesome family entertainment company Disney did for this 9-11 drama.

Actually, his film on the NRA contains quite a few complete fabrications and outright lies. And Moore has admitted so - he says it's entertainment, not a factual documentary. There are also outright lies in Fahrenheit 911.

So, since this is an entertainment film, and not a factual documentary, I think it's fine.

Hmm, it's "entertainment" masquerading as politics..

Hmm, it's "entertainment" masquerading as politics..

Hey, if Michael Moore can do it multiple times, and no one pulls his films...

it's the wave of the present...

Gauthier should get used to what is already status quo - manipulating the media in the form of entertainment to manufacture facts.

Why else would an airhead like Katie Couric get the job that used to go to a professional, seasoned, experienced, impeccably credentialed journalist like Walter Cronkite?

Actually, his film on the NRA contains quite a few complete fabrications and outright lies. And Moore has admitted so - he says it's entertainment, not a factual documentary. There are also outright lies in Fahrenheit 911.

So, since this is an entertainment film, and not a factual documentary, I think it's fine.

Of course you do. You think accuracy is cute and should be ignored whenever it suits you. ABC is hawking this as a "docudrama" and has only agreed to put disclaimers about the accuracy of the show on because of the intense pressure they've been under, and it's still unclear whether or not they're going to tag it as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report" when it clearly isn't.

Add in that the only people to receive advance screen copies are right-wing bloggers and people like Rush Limbaugh while people actually depicted in the damn thing can't get their phone calls returned, and you have full-scale right-wing propaganda.

You may get your police state yet, you piece of shit.

Of course you do. You think accuracy is cute and should be ignored whenever it suits you. ABC is hawking this as a "docudrama" and has only agreed to put disclaimers about the accuracy of the show on because of the intense pressure they've been under, and it's still unclear whether or not they're going to tag it as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report" when it clearly isn't.

Add in that the only people to receive advance screen copies are right-wing bloggers and people like Rush Limbaugh while people actually depicted in the damn thing can't get their phone calls returned, and you have full-scale right-wing propaganda.

You may get your police state yet, you piece of shit.

Hey, they didn't give President Bush a pre-screening of Fahrenheit 911, did they?

And you were OK with that film, right?

Hey, they didn't give President Bush a pre-screening of Fahrenheit 911, did they?

And you were OK with that film, right?

I doubt he's ever watched the film, or would have even if he were invited to a pre-screening.

I don't think the movie should have been made. I think getting entertainment value out of the 9/11 tragedies is a fucking sick piece of work. You know, I would like nothing better than to beat whoever worked on this movie senseless. All of them. Everytime I think of 9/11 I thank God I have a chance to bring the fight to the terrorists. I sure as hell don't think it should be the next FX movie premiere so somebody can make a few million dollars off of a spectacle.


:upyours: :mp5:

Welcome to the Magical World of Disney.

I don't think the movie should have been made. I think getting entertainment value out of the 9/11 tragedies is a fucking sick piece of work. You know, I would like nothing better than to beat whoever worked on this movie senseless. All of them. Everytime I think of 9/11 I thank God I have a chance to bring the fight to the terrorists. I sure as hell don't think it should be the next FX movie premiere so somebody can make a few million dollars off of a spectacle.


:upyours: :mp5:

And Michael Moore made a movie about what?

I don't think the movie should have been made. I think getting entertainment value out of the 9/11 tragedies is a fucking sick piece of work. You know, I would like nothing better than to beat whoever worked on this movie senseless. All of them. Everytime I think of 9/11 I thank God I have a chance to bring the fight to the terrorists. I sure as hell don't think it should be the next FX movie premiere so somebody can make a few million dollars off of a spectacle.


:upyours: :mp5:

Are you ok with movies about WWII or Viet Nam?

They're were a hell of a lot more tragedies then

Are you ok with movies about WWII or Viet Nam?

They're were a hell of a lot more tragedies then

A lot more dead civilians, that's for sure.

And people wonder why I don't watch the networks (except for House, but that's because House is one of the top four most awesome shows ever!)

And people wonder why I don't watch the networks (except for House, but that's because House is one of the top four most awesome shows ever!)
I'm with you. I don't even watch cable news.

Hey, they didn't give President Bush a pre-screening of Fahrenheit 911, did they?

And you were OK with that film, right?

If he'd asked, I'll bet he'd have gotten it. After all, Moore did show it in Crawford Texas and invited Bush to attend.

If he'd asked, I'll bet he'd have gotten it. After all, Moore did show it in Crawford Texas and invited Bush to attend.

Why should he have to ask? Was ever an offer made to edit it to Bush's pleasure?

No.

Like I said, if people can't tell the difference between entertainment and news, then that is the problem, not the film.

Moore comes out point blank - he's making entertainment, not a factual documentary. Which is fine.

So, why can't someone else do it, while retaining full editorial control?

Or does Clinton get a pass to edit films not to his liking?