Printable View
Someone in a previous post got their facts mixed up about the the funding of the Afghani resistance during the Soviet invasion. If you want the straight dope, read Charlie Wilson's War and Ghost Wars.
I bet there's even an article @ wikipedia.org that can help you clear up the misunderstanding of Osama's presence in Afghanistan.
Do you have any idea how large the bin Laden clan is? Irish Catholics would be in awe.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ.Brk
Understandable, but Moore doesn't think of himself as an entertainer. He portrays himself as a documentarian crusading for truth and justice. He is a propogandist crusading for fame and fortune (his own).Quote:
Originally Posted by RootSkier
Was never much of a Dixie Chicks fan. I think it is awesome they spoke their minds and a shame they were shunned for it. (currently listening to Rage Against the Machine)Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTV
"Bush is bad, that makes OK for Moore to be bad." BLINDINGLY BRILLIANTQuote:
Originally Posted by snow_slider
So you are saying it's to lie to and mislead the "uniformed americans" because the other side is lying to them too. Just Machavellian/Realpolitik I suppose. :rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by klar
His technique and lies disgusted me. His constantly changing "point" was amusing. His comments about the fear-factory media are fairly on the money. Yet, he offers no solutions.Quote:
Originally Posted by lemon boy
All douchebags. Lock them in a room. I think moore will eat all the right wingers. He'll die from an overdose after eating Rush. The world will be a better place.Quote:
Moore is a liberal version of the "controvertialist" tradition that is ususally pretty right wing. Not really different than Savage, Rush
Blaming Michael Moore for inciting anti americanism is beyond stupid. I'm sick of your little "your KIND" holier than thou comments, and your tendency to put words in other peoples mouths.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
Excuse me sir, I resent your implication. Don't tell me it didn't happen. I can't say I've ever heard that story from anyone else. I don't read political blog sites on any side of the spectrum. I doubt I was a source for storie7rs on such sites as I never really posted about it on the web (wasn't on forums so much then). I saw it at the Tivoli Theater in Kansas City, MO and some dickhead stood up and clapped and cheered. The theater was packed. You say this was a common story. I don't find it that hard to believe that in theaters with 100-300 people in them that ocaissionally someone was wacked enough to cheer for murder. I argued with more than one lunatic friend (anti-globalization communist fringe type) at the time who believed that the WTC was a legitimate target because it housed "the machines and soldiers of neo-imperialism," including "support troops" like janitors. I can't say anything to others claims except that it sounds believable after my personal experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
I am not from the US and, by most standards, I'd be described as a liberal but I walked out of Fahrenheit 9-11 feeling as if I'd just watched a disingenuous and cheap hack job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
Moore didn't need to try so hard to make his point. He overegged it badly and the overall effect was to ruin the whole exercise. Right thinking people of my KIND will think it was a steaming heap of dump.
What I really resent is you insinuating that people that are against the war on terror also cheered on the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Now you might not have said so outright, but that little comment in the middle of your post certainly points towards you thinking that. The reason that this story was posted on right wing blogs was to completely discredit everyone on the left, mainly rational liberals as and wack job radicals. I am sick of these scare tactics being used to cow entire segments of the population.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
Summit- you do have to admit that was a decent trap he led you into. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
as for his method disgusting you...why go see two of his movies then? I personally don't really care for them but anyone who's not a simpering idiot should be able to recognize his supposed distortions and cherry picking.
Roo- RIGHT THE FUCK ON!
Lemon Boy - Yea... he set me up. But I try to be genuine in my discussion so:
No, I wasn't trying to imply that at all, nor do I believe that, nor should anyone else. Also, you have no clue about my thoughts on the War on Terror.Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
-----------------------
ETA My theory:
I think Moore knows that "Preaching to the chior" isn't as useless as the adage as come to mean. He's found a mass of people willign to deify him (give him power, fame, and fortune) if he will say what they want to hear by any means necessary. That is why he overplayed it.
He is not a genuine person as can be seen from his tactics. If he was more objective, he might win the argument more upon the centrists or the educated, but he wouldn't get the fanatical devotion from fans, political support, money etc. Controversey and cheap shots sell. He'd have been just another documentarian and his chance at cult-of-personality would have failed. Trying to pass himself off as the documentarian crusading for truth and justice is integral.
Either that or he too is deluded by his own work and actually doesn't see himself as the fame and money seeking propogandist that he is.
Oh yah... Roo... on the money!
I think you use labels in here more than anybody. Anything or anybody remotley out of sync with your opinion gets labeled a neocon. Shit, you will pry up previous posts, and personal information on people, like their occupation, to counter balance any logical thought they might have had that disagrees with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
And if you think that farenheit 911 was recievel as solemly by the rest of the world as it was by us, you need to get out more. People love to hate us, moore gave them something to cheer about. And cheered they did.
Lets get back to talking about how great Jimmy Carter was. I for one would like to point out his successes in negotiating the Agreed Framework or visiting Cuba, both stellar representations of his omniscience within foreign affairs.
That said his work with HoH, Gloabal health care are commendable, and he is still a sunday school teacher.
The problem I have is with the Bush supporters' implied opinion that those who support Bush and the war are smart enough to see through Moore's obvious biases and misrepresentations, but those who oppose Bush and the war aren't. Maybe, just maybe, those on the anti-war side realize what Moore is doing too - and aren't cheering the misrepresentations but the FACTS contained in between them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
Surely you aren't claiming that the plain naked facts referred to throughout the movie were false? Sure he gussied up a lot of the situations to drive the points home more forcefully, and absolutely he disregarded some points in order to make his own seem more important, but when it all comes down to it most people who've watched this movie are hopefully intelligent enough to separate the bullshit from the real shit and draw their own conclusions - no matter what side of the matter they were on before they hit 'play' or walked into the theater.
i'd say you are probably a bit more informed than the average european, compensated by english as your mother tongue. continental europeans, on average, are/were completely clueless as to the accuracy of the movie. most friends here in switz bought it hook, line, and sinker. even after i talked some sense into them (with point by point debunking) they still clinged to it as "essential truth", i.e. it may not be truthful but it supports their preconceived view. and the effect on the arab world - i imagine it's 100x worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by bad_roo
Summit, then you should be more careful of how you structure you postings, cause that's how it came off. Generally, I find your posts pretty rational, and and enjoyable, and I jumped on that sentence due to it's wild departure from the rationality you have shown in the past.
Lemon Boy,
I've never seen F 9/11, I was too busy working 100 hours a week on a campaign to see a movie that was obviously so obviously partisan and actually wound up doing more harm than good. I did see BFC, and found that one to be an interesting commentary on our culture, but beyond that, pretty pointless. Since it preached to people who wouldn't go beyond complaining about the current state of affairs without doing anything about it, I wrote it off.
Do I need to pry out the PM's you sent me calling me rational?? I have many times agreed with certain policy objectives of conservatives, I have objected to people who make wild comments about nuking entire populations, and yes, called them insane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
Good points roo - many people seem to have a problem with understanding that you can agree with Moores views without agreeing with his methods. As usual the counter arguments made against OUR KIND always fail to address the main point that F9/11 did still manage to make - the fucked reasoning for invading Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by bad_roo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
Why you gotta try and bring up Oooold Shit?
You may need to get more. As Roo posted above, from a Brit perspective, I found the same as a Canuck. Most of us are actually smart enough to see through Micheal Moores creative editing. A vast majority of the people I know base their opinions on having researched both right and left wing sources, deciding on a balance point themselves.Quote:
And if you think that farenheit 911 was recievel as solemly by the rest of the world as it was by us, you need to get out more. People love to hate us, moore gave them something to cheer about. And cheered they did.
Not everyone forms an opinion based on a couple of ten second sound bites.
Actually, Ripzalot makes a good point. Maybe as a Canadian we have far more access to both sides of American news that others don't. Although, I suspect a lot of the people around the world that take MM as gospel would be anti-american with or without him.
Im just talking about Moore and the movie. I have no doubt that most Americans care enough to "seperate the bullshit from the real shit". This movie was marketed as a documentary, and most of the world does not care to understand the difference. He showed most of the world exactly what they wanted to see. What motive did they have to seperate the bullshit from the truth? Its just entertainment for them. And unlike ual 93 or the others, he used those images to his benefit.Quote:
Originally Posted by seatosky
I have no problem with the debate in this country or the efforts of the many to discredit this president. We all do it to eachoter, but when some of us reach out to the entire world to seek support for our tactics I consider that disloyal and damaging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seatosky
I posted this earlier, but here it is again:
59Deceits of Michael Moore
MM lives in a world of his own imagination. Far too many (otherwise intelligent) people are all too quick to believe the dreck he puts out because it seems to justify their political hatred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayHarder
I happen to be a Brit,a canuck as well as an American. i m not talking about me.
I was in South America when that movie came out down there, and I heard many an educated person glorify Moore's spin to suit their own mental satisfaction. Just like we do ourselves. Something registers differently for a liberal than it does a conservative. Left half the brain, right half, whatever. Many countries resent the USA, and have for a long time. Having some fat bloated American feed them what they want to hear is ok.
I am sure most of you would have a problem with others entertaining themselves at our expense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTV
Actually you are quite wrong on this point. The only people that have learned anything have been at the top end of the spectrum. The middle managers have learned not a thing on both sides. The insurgents had to learn again in Fallujah and out in the wild west before they realized it was a bad idea to go toe to toe with much superior force.
The guy you so depise Rumsfield is the one that pushed down the military's throat that you don't need or want a big force in most places which is why the generals have not liked him so much. Bin Laden also realized not to go toe to toe with us but as has our military has failed at the mid level so has theres although they have had a much harder time recovering.
you sleep in the bed you make.
It doesn't but having signed on the dotted line and given part of your life, to honor and defend your country, puts you in a position that both fat ass MMQuote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
And GWB (that NG cakewalk, bullshit don't count) have not been in. IMHO
Didn't Bush tell us the war in Iraq was to "protect the American way of life" ? For the last 50 years cheap oil/cheap energy/corporate profits are the basis for the American way of life. He didn't lie he just couldn't fully verbalize his rationale. </sarcasm>
Quote:
Originally Posted by MassLiberal
Dude, you are rational. And no you do not need to pry out any private messages. But you referred to that as some neconblogoshpere and its just not true. Many around the world took the movie for fact and cheered at our demise.
Easy with the insults, my dog died in my arms last night. 15 yrs old.