Farenheit 9/11

[Quackzilla]

I was expecting the usual Michael Moore crap but it is actually a very well argued no-bs documentary.

I highly recommend, unless you are an uptight close minded right wing lunatic that spends his days glued to FOX News. The actual EVIDENCE presented will drive you insane and force you to reevaluate your position.

[eebuckeye]

Glad you liked it, but if you believe it was all true you are truly dreaming. He puts quite the spin on many of the "facts" presented. With that being said, I'm probably voting for Kerry but believing everything you see in the movie is nuts.

[epobirs]

The evidence is nonexistent. THe entire film is nothing but false insinuation, distortions, manipulation, and self-contradiction.

Try to do some reading before drinking the Kool-Aid. It's poisoned.

BTW, if you're an American, are you aware that Moore gets very well paid to go to foreign countries and tell fawning audience he think Americans are the stupidest people on the planet? This is the guy you gave your money to by going to his propagada spiel.

[Quackzilla]

0_o

I doubt either of you watched the movie

[PsyClerk]

Hold on a minute, we already had this flame war.

REPEAT!

[WarrenGekko]

Good movie but Moore is spinning it.
He gives you facts but not all the facts. He leaves out the facts that don't support his position.
Case in point. The 9/11 commission showed that Iraq was NOT involved with Al Queda during that World Trade Center bombings. Moore put that fact into the movie. What he purposely left out was that same commission did show a lot of evidence of Iraq involvement with Al Queda, they just didn't have any involvment with the World Trade Center.

[ZForce915]

0_o

I doubt either of you watched the movie

I agree. They claim that there are no facts, yet they never say EXACTALY what is "false". There is a good reason why they can't say what's false...
1) they likely didn't see it
2) they listen to what the media has to say about it without forming an opinion on their own

You don't have to like him. You don't have to agree with him. But if you want to bash him, at least have something to say.

On another note, this topic has been done and I believe there is a "official political thread" in which to discuss things like this.

[Medium_Pimpin]

Here comes another debate topic........


Anyways my 2 cents:
One of the most important movies ever made. There are alot of facts here, and the rest is certainly open to discussion. Im glad someone had the balls to say some of the stuff ive been thinking about since Mr. Bush was (NOT) elected.


For those religious right wingers who havent seen the movie and just like to complain about anit-bush politics:
Go download the movie! Michael moore and Lions gate films have given you permission. Watch the movie and see if you can defend bush so easily.

[epobirs]

I can post links to several dozen detailed analyses of the film's failings if you like. The list of things wrong in the flick is growing quite long as researchers track down more of the details.

As it stands I wouldn't trust Moore to say the sky was blue on a clear day if he thought it served some purpose towards his career of separating foolish liberals from their money.

[ZForce915]

I can post links to several dozen detailed analyses of the film's failings if you like. The list of things wrong in the flick is growing quite long as researchers track down more of the details.

As it stands I wouldn't trust Moore to say the sky was blue on a clear day if he thought it served some purpose towards his career of separating foolish liberals from their money.

Then do it.

[ZForce915]

I can post links to several dozen detailed analyses of the film's failings if you like. The list of things wrong in the flick is growing quite long as researchers track down more of the details.

As it stands I wouldn't trust Moore to say the sky was blue on a clear day if he thought it served some purpose towards his career of separating foolish liberals from their money.

Anything from Bill O'Reilly doesn't count. Or Rush Limburger...those two are so far off of this planet I don't know where to begin.

[Wshakspear]

As i said in the other thread, the most touching and memorable part of that movie was watching thr woman from Flint going from War supporter because of her children, to a broken woman who has lost a son in a war the son himself was questioning, to a stronger woman in DC looking for answers only to be talked down by some stupid woman who thinks she knows anything. The rest of the movie was basically TV coverage mixed with some ideas....

[Medium_Pimpin]

It wont be hard to find an article bashing the facts in moores movie to some degree... there was even an article in my local newspaper movie section:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/movies/2001972076_fahrenheit05.html

[Wshakspear]

I can post links to several dozen detailed analyses of the film's failings if you like. The list of things wrong in the flick is growing quite long as researchers track down more of the details.

As it stands I wouldn't trust Moore to say the sky was blue on a clear day if he thought it served some purpose towards his career of separating foolish liberals from their money.

Anything from Bill O'Reilly doesn't count. Or Rush Limburger...those two are so far off of this planet I don't know where to begin.

Oh come on, he's fair AND balanced! Who could ask for more?

[Calico]

I read that Moore approved of the downloading of this movie... this is in response to his critics saying that he's in it for the money. Either he doesn't get a percentage of the profit, or was just speaking before thinking or is not in it for the money. In any case the studio is not happy with him.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/04/140240

I heard that the movie studio has a link to the download on their site too.

View the movie and draw own conclusions.

[vherub]

For those religious right wingers who havent seen the movie and just like to complain about anit-bush politics:
Go download the movie! Michael moore and Lions gate films have given you permission. Watch the movie and see if you can defend bush so easily.

where so at?

[Squirms]

Here are some good points brought up by Newsweek. The article does a pretty good job of being non-partisan about the film, but does point to some flaws and innuendo.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek

[Medium_Pimpin]

For those religious right wingers who havent seen the movie and just like to complain about anit-bush politics:
Go download the movie! Michael moore and Lions gate films have given you permission. Watch the movie and see if you can defend bush so easily.

where so at?


They are not hosting a site but you can grab the movie off peer to peer networks. Only a cam recording was out the last time i checked, but it's not like this is a special effects bonanza. It's a documentary.

[bignick]

Moore is a socialist asshat.

[ZForce915]

Moore is a socialist asshat.

There is that word again. Asshat. It's taking the world by storm!

[organicow]

Moore is a socialist asshat.

I propose we replace "asshat" with "cockshirt," or perhaps "pussysleeve." You know, mix it up a little!

BTW, while I have seen this movie, and do have a strong sense of political allegiance, I will refrain from discussing it here. I don't want to get involved in another flame war! (especially since i kinda pissed off "epobirs" in another thread; he's likely to flame anything I say... :roll: )

[PsyClerk]

There is that word again. Asshat. It's taking the world by storm!

Welcome to two years ago. It's been around a long time, particularly on Fark.com.

[The_Continental]

A major point of this movie is that while working for the Carlyle Group in 1996, George Bush senior received a $1.6 million kickback from the Saudi government to push the Carlyle BDM acquisition... I guess Moore wanted to show that the Bush family had a vested interest in private Saudi interest.

Funny thing is though, that Bush senior didn't start working for Carlyle until 1998, a full two years later.

During the acquisition in 1996, he was retired in Texas. hmmmm.....

[CTLesq]

For those religious right wingers who havent seen the movie and just like to complain about anit-bush politics:
Go download the movie! Michael moore and Lions gate films have given you permission. Watch the movie and see if you can defend bush so easily.

where so at?


They are not hosting a site but you can grab the movie off peer to peer networks. Only a cam recording was out the last time i checked, but it's not like this is a special effects bonanza. It's a documentary.

I am getting the bootleg of it from someone at work. I would like to see it.

1. I have no interest in adding to the box office take of this film.
2. Most people I know who have seen this film were at first quite impressed with the "facts" presented. Over time and after reflection they were not as impressed.

So I want to see it. I am smart enough to make up my own mind.

CTL

[Stryffe2004]

I have seen it. If even one half or one quarter of it is true, it is still very disturbing.

[chickenhawk]

I'd like to preface this post by saying I have not seen the movie, but I would like to ask/point out a couple things about it.

1. Alot of you have said that the facts "opened your eyes" and that this movie is so important and brings the truth to light, but Moore himself has openly stated that a very small percantage of the movie actually presents new information. Why is this movie so important? Because it challenges President Bush? Moore was doing that before making this movie.

2. I have heard (not from O'Reilly or Rush) that the movie is edited such that it moves very quickly and covers up it's own contradictions. I am not making a conclusion. I am just asking...those of you who saw it and thought it was right on, what is your response to this? Right wing propaganda, or is there some truth to it?

There are so many people who are on both sides of the extreme that it makes me very skeptical that either side is completely right. As with most everything else, it's my opinion that the validity of this movie as a whole probably falls somewhere in between. Based on what I know of it, this movie is not a documentary, it's one mans opinion and interpretation of the facts, which is, by his own admission, biased.

[CTLesq]

There are so many people who are on both sides of the extreme that it makes me very skeptical that either side is completely right. As with most everything else, it's my opinion that the validity of this movie as a whole probably falls somewhere in between. Based on what I know of it, this movie is not a documentary, it's one mans opinion and interpretation of the facts, which is, by his own admission, biased.

I assure you, being a member of the Right, we are 110% correct about everything.

[Wshakspear]

I'd like to preface this post by saying I have not seen the movie, but I would like to ask/point out a couple things about it.

1. Alot of you have said that the facts "opened your eyes" and that this movie is so important and brings the truth to light, but Moore himself has openly stated that a very small percantage of the movie actually presents new information. Why is this movie so important? Because it challenges President Bush? Moore was doing that before making this movie.

2. I have heard (not from O'Reilly or Rush) that the movie is edited such that it moves very quickly and covers up it's own contradictions. I am not making a conclusion. I am just asking...those of you who saw it and thought it was right on, what is your response to this? Right wing propaganda, or is there some truth to it?

There are so many people who are on both sides of the extreme that it makes me very skeptical that either side is completely right. As with most everything else, it's my opinion that the validity of this movie as a whole probably falls somewhere in between. Based on what I know of it, this movie is not a documentary, it's one mans opinion and interpretation of the facts, which is, by his own admission, biased.

1 = This is a collection of clips and papers that were readily available...if you took the time to go find said info. He took the stuff that he belives was "Hidden by the Bush agenda" and brought it into the light. Some of it was just just footage of "Hi, im in the army, i like Ozzy" (?) while another part of it was showing a recently released document that for whatever reason got a name edited compared to the 2000 version of the same paper.
As far as importance, to me it was seeing some items (Bush right after the attacks, Flint Lady, Afghanie (?) lady) that were either passed on very quickly in the news, or never shown before. To me it showed a complete breakdown of government...not just mr bush.

2 = He used mtv style editing parts for his opinion pieces and montoges (i so cant freakin spell this morning...damn) while letting certain parts about the army men in iraq as well as Flint lady and the part where he was trying to get senators to enlist thier sons linger and stay on screen a few seconds longer.

As far as my opinion goes, im against "the stupid party" i hate stupid things no matter if its a democratic f'up or a republican f'up or any other partys f'up, i dont like it. I went into the movie AFTER doing research on it, and that let me see it with an open mind but not enough to allow the BS parts to sink in.

The movie was interesting, but no where near as good as spider-man 2 or Anchorman (Best. Movie. Ever.)

:) i like nulling my opinions :)

[Wshakspear]

There are so many people who are on both sides of the extreme that it makes me very skeptical that either side is completely right. As with most everything else, it's my opinion that the validity of this movie as a whole probably falls somewhere in between. Based on what I know of it, this movie is not a documentary, it's one mans opinion and interpretation of the facts, which is, by his own admission, biased.

I assure you, being a member of the Right, we are 110% correct about everything.

You sir, are a pussysleeve.

[Quackzilla]

Moore is a socialist asshat.

Wow, that was a very well-rounded response that totally changes my opinion.

Sweet life, man

[CTLesq]

There are so many people who are on both sides of the extreme that it makes me very skeptical that either side is completely right. As with most everything else, it's my opinion that the validity of this movie as a whole probably falls somewhere in between. Based on what I know of it, this movie is not a documentary, it's one mans opinion and interpretation of the facts, which is, by his own admission, biased.

I assure you, being a member of the Right, we are 110% correct about everything.

You sir, are a pussysleeve.

You sir, have no SOH.

[Rodimus]

People keep saying that some "facts" in the movie arn't really true, or they're not completly correct.

I want examples, so tell me what's not completly true. I'm not debating, just curious.