Fahrenheit 9/11

People debated, they fought, some of them were called names *gasp* and in turn called others names, words were spun out of thin air, lies were told *GASP* and the end conclusion was America is to blame for the death of all cockroaches everywhere *GAAAASSSSSSPPPPPP*.

Please kill this before all the trolls come out.

.
.
https://www.techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=8&threadID=154809&start=0&tag=search

Who do you believe: us, or Michael Moore?
The Chicago Sun-Times ^ | July 13, 2004 | PHIL ROSENTHAL

Posted on 07/13/2004 5:31:00 AM PDT by MadIvan

LOS ANGELES -- When it comes to assessing TV news coverage of the situation in Iraq, much of "Fahrenheit 9/11" is Hindsight 20/20, according to NBC's Tom Brokaw.

Of greater concern to him and other top network newspeople, however, is the sense that some moviegoers consider Michael Moore's film more credible than their own reports.

"My complaint was not with the criticism. I don't complain about anything he has said. My concern is that this not be taken as journalism," ABC "Nightline" host Ted Koppel said Monday. "It is journalism in the sense that an editorial in the Chicago Sun-Times is journalism, but that's opinion journalism. It's a different sort of thing.

"I worry that too many people are going to start taking that as gospel when indeed I know for a fact that there are things in that movie that a little bit of careful reporting could have corrected. But I don't think [Moore] was altogether interested in getting it straight down the middle. He was interested in making a political statement, and he did it very well.

"It's a terrific piece of entertainment. There are even some interesting facts in it, but it is to the documentary what [Oliver Stone's] 'JFK' film was to history."

Brokaw seemed particularly peeved by "9/11." When asked about the film by a West Coast TV critic, he asked if the critic thought Moore's movie to be an accurate portrayal. The critic said yes. "Of what?" Brokaw shot back.

"It's really easy to turn back the clock now and say, 'Oh, it was the fault [of the media], especially of the electronic media, that we went to war because they jumped on the bandwagon,' " Brokaw said. "If you do a fair review, we gave a very vigorous accounting of what was known and what was not known at the time. ... The American news networks and the newspapers, for the most part, did as well as they could under the circumstances."

Citizens, however, may be becoming increasingly wary. ABC's George Stephanopoulos, a former adviser to Bill Clinton, tells of meeting last week with undecided Republican and Democratic voters in Ohio, encountering a handful who had seen "Fahrenheit 9/11."

"What was most striking to me is that when I asked them, 'Why did you go to see it?' they said, 'Because we wanted to get the facts,' " Stephanopoulos said. "There wasn't time to get into a big argument with them ... but at least a few of them had the sense that if it's coming from the government [or] if it's coming from established media, they must not be telling us something and we have to go to this alternative venue to get the facts. I think that's a challenge for all of us."

Part of that challenge stems from the fact that, even when dealing with the same information, there is a big difference between traditional journalism and other sources.

" 'Nightline' is not nearly as entertaining as 'Fahrenheit 9/11,' " Koppel said. "We're never going to be as entertaining as '9/11.' We're never going to be as entertaining as the movie 'JFK.' But there is still, I think, a desperate need for down-the-middle news."

Not everyone agrees, though. More and more people, especially young people, are said to be inclined to seek their news from unconventional sources, such as Comedy Central's "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" or Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11."

"I do worry about young people going and seeing that film and seeing it as the gospel," said Brokaw, who is scheduled to step down as anchor of "NBC Nightly News" later this year. "You've all read the various accounts that have been done, by us and by Newsweek and by others, about what was factually incorrect or the liberties that [Moore] took with the facts as he arranged them.

"It is very skillfully done. He's a master at getting his point of view on the big screen. I mean, look, the right has Rush [Limbaugh] and the left has Michael Moore and they are very good at presenting their points of view, saying this is factual. Truth is a little more elusive, and it's the arrangement of those facts."

As for the notion that the film is packed with previously unreported information, ABC "World News Tonight" anchor Peter Jennings said he actually was "surprised by how much of the ground we'd already covered."

"But," Koppel said, "we didn't do those stories as political polemics. And I am concerned on both sides of the political spectrum that if what Americans feel they have to get is news with an attitude, what they're going to end up losing is some of the objectivity that traditionally people in our business have tried at least -- we don't always succeed, but we have tried -- to bring to these stories."

What might irk Brokaw most is that he personally spent time reporting in Iraq before the war to better understand the situation there.

"I had a lot of people come up to me and, quietly, at some risk, say: 'When are the Americans coming? We can't continue to live like this,' " Brokaw said. "And the only scenes we saw in Michael Moore's film ... were children sliding down playground ramps and so on.

"That was not an accurate portrayal. This was one of the most repressive regimes in history. Was it an appropriate excuse to go to war? That's a whole other debate. ... [But] the idea of using Michael Moore's very artful, very strong point of view as some kind of gold standard, I think, is just wholly inappropriate. I really do."

.
If you feel so inclined, read this point-by-point examination. It's a long read, but well worth the time, as it provides an excellent dissection of everything Michael Moore asserts in his "documentary" (and I use that term lightly).

http://www.davidkopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

Why is it ONLY political feuds that you partake in? where are your comments and help to those asking about work? Where is your supoprt for those with problems? Where is your support for people asking about starting their own businesses? Where is your....I know, up your A** with your ideals.

get with the program, there's more to TR than political threads, there are people looking for help and comments on IT, have you supported or helped ANY of your fellow countrymen? Nope.

You only participate where you know your buddy Max will help speak for you and perhaps make your own thoughts sound sensible as you don't really have aclue yourself, you have nothing to say otherwise and refue to participate in helping TR peers or commenting outside the political pro-Bush rants.

Step up to the plate for a change and show us all that Garion isn't just a pissd off little yank wanker.

We can not let agression go unanswered. Mr. Bush is a courageous individual. He now stands as the most hated individual in decades. How remarkable is that! The world hates America and anyone who would protect it be here at home or abroad.
I pray for Mr. Bush and all of us. Especially if Mr.Kerry and company should win the election.

Well you are correct David Koppel is a very well recognized researcher. The webpage you linked to is a farce though. It discredoits NOTHING stated in MM's movie except MM himself for editing or not including things. As for the information presented, it does little to discount it. It is purely a he said/she said scenario as I said before.

DFor such a well nkown and accomplished journalist to make such horrendous copy errors as to italicize an dentire letter is completely wierd. It's as if the whole letter is quoted.

As for it's discounting MM'smovie, it doesn't nor does it attempt to.

"Viewers will have to decide for themselves whether the extremist and extremely deceptive Fahrenheit 9/11 is a conscientious work of patriotic dissent, or the cynical propaganda of a man who gives wartime aid to America?s murderous enemies, and who accepts their aid in return."

He doesn't follow your lead and call MM a liar, he say he is deceptive, which everyone agrees he is. MM has omitted comments and made things appear to look worse than they are, he has not LIED per se. Even your great reporter/researcher think it is up to the viewer to take out of it what they will, whether '...extremist is and extremely deceptive Fahrenheit 9/11 is a conscientious work of patriotic dissent, or the cynical propaganda of a man who gives wartime aid to America?s murderous enemies, and who accepts their aid in return."

Extremist yes, deceptive yes, LIES, well even David Koppel doesn't say that.

If you are unable to see the truth hidden in the message it is your blindess or unwillingness to accept reality, not mine for watching it but your for NOT watching it.

Ever since the tragic September 11th took place, I've been getting the impression that the media has been cautious in the way it reports to the public, almost as if it deliberately focuses only the side that would make Bush look pretty. It is as if there was a certain repression that was not experienced during the Clinton administration. This suspicion arose when I began to compare the reports from US media to other countries such as Mexico. Because I live in southern border I get to see what happens on both countries. Some of Mexico?s finest correspondents were sent over to Afghanistan and Iraq and there were some major differences between their reports and US correspondents. Its not they were focusing on the dark side, but they would rather balance as many sides as possible. They would check on the government?s press conferences, government officials, the people in the Middle East, soldiers, even media from other countries.

They risked their lives to do their job. They were there when the invasion of Iraq began and reported live as it happened. One of them was almost killed when a tank fired at his hotel building only two rooms away from him. One of their Spanish colleagues was killed in that blast by the way. They were in the crown when the statue of Saddam Hussein was brought down, and so on. When I went to see the Fahrenheit 9/11, I really didn?t know what to expect, but I was unimpressed by at least half of what they showed because I was already informed by the Mexican media. Some of the material was new to me, but everyone else in the room was far more impressed than I was. I think Moore makes his point very well. After all, he only shows things the way they are. Some people complain about certain ?inaccuracies? such as children playing and how that doesn?t show how life in Iraq really was. Well, after so much bloodshed so far it doesn?t get any prettier. Besides, who can realistically think that the situation in Iraq was so bad that not even kids could go out a play a bit in plain day light?

And what about the so called weapons of mass destruction? It probably doesn?t matter anymore because the country?s credibitility is already ruined. If Bush was so concerned about WMD why didn?t he go after North Korea instead? -- A country that does admit to have them and threatens to use them anyone messes up with them. It also bothers me that the cost in terms of lives and cash has been so outrageously high. If we would have done this differently, do you think we would have Osama Bin Laden instead of Hussein? I still got a lot more questions and complaints about this administration, but it hurts my fingers of just thinking of all typing I would have to do.

you are a dumbshit, whose a complete a asshole to boot. You never answer any questions either, you never provide any "proofs", you are a blind mole whose only goal is to rant against America and her interests whether she is right or wrong.

America is safer under GWB - We haven't been attacked since 9/11 - The rest of the world has ... Hum I wonder why. Is it because they listen to the liberal side and try to appease the terrorist? -

If you have ever been in the military you understand that in the middle east - weakness is negiotating - an eye for an eye is strength..

Let see how long after the train bombing in spain were they attacked again - 1 week ... didn't move fast enough ... Hum - something didn't work there now did it... Even after Spain agreed to withdraw... Hum 2 + 2 = 6 and they were attacked again.. and will be attacked again ...

.
On the issue of Fahrenheit 9/11, and anything related, it certainly rises the blood temperatures of many people to about 911 degrees Fahrenheit.

Should I hold my breath waiting for his documentary on the UN Oil for Food scandal that involves Iraq, France, Germany, Russia and some 270 questionable companies (all of whom opposed removing Saddam conveniently) that took billions from Saddam in oil for weapons and weapons systems instead of food and medicine intended for the Iraqi people. Isn't Moore the exposer of corporate greed, isn't he concerned about the welfare of the little guy?

Should I hold my breath?

~LoL~ Didn't we have this discussion?

I disn't discedit or try to prove you wrong at all, in any way shape or form. I merely said what MY take was.

Were you not looking for replies?

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind political discussions, but this one just seemed like deja vu to me and everyone else. I dont' mind other discussions though. One this is for sure, there is always news. Unfortunately, GWB, the election, WMD, and MM are all the hot news stories right now here. I come from a pretty rual state, and news isn't that exciting here, unless you want to talk about why Mrs. Smith was visiting Mr. Jones so late that night :) Got to love small town gossip.

YOur're right Oz, if this wasn't an IT website, I considered wasting company time. Oh, but wait, I am the Administrator ;)

I like Whales. I grew up around Puget Sound and loved to see them. Kind of miss them a bit now.

Can I ask who you THINK you've saved yourself from?

Was it the POSSIBILTY that Saddam could kil Americans? I see nobody died from Saddam's minions, that's good.

If you are even THINKING of implying Saddam attacked or even COULD attack you with WMD, think again, you couldn't be more wrong.

Your separitist sentiment is also very honorable of you, why not just come to Canada and spit on the troops IF they ever get finished in Iran.

For someone who served in the military you sure don't have any respect for those that have always fought beside you, whether or not you shoot at them on purpose or by accident.

During the last election Michael Moore came to Canada and spouted off about one of our politicians, leader of the Conservatives, Stephen Harper.

A few young conservatives found an obscure law regarding non-Canadians attempting to unduely influence the outcome of the election and are attempting to have Moore charged on the law. Canadian law, like US law, is derived from British common law, which depends on precedence, and so this would be a tough law to prosecute on.

So the mayor of Sarnia Ontario decided to grant Moore special status as an "honourary" Canadian(which has no legal weight what so ever).

Personally, I don't think that anyone has ever been successfully prosecuted under such a vague law and so I doubt it will even get to court.

If you saw Bowling for Columbine, you saw MM in some scenes in Toronto where he opened up strangers doors and walked in. I can think of a few houses where he should try that in other areas of Toronto....

James

It's pick a side and stick to it, there is no room for being accepting of both.

Now while I say I am NOT a MM supporter (in the sense that I don't buy all his "facts", in the same sense, I will defend his ability to speak as an American and also that what he says is too quickly dismissed by those who just don't WANT to believe in him.

This doesn't mae me PRo-MM, then again, not being Pro-Rapublican seems to automatically make me Pro-Democratis in your eyes. The mind boggles trying to understand why it is for or against with no middle ground in America!? It certainly explains why you always seem to be at war though.

Should he be in my living room one day, I will become an instant MM basher(literally).

I know when I was living in Nova Scotia, people never locked doors, then again that was SOME time ago (78?).

I rarely lock myown front dor, I know all the locals and if Bob needed to borrow a Video tape and didn't wake me, oh well. For the most part there is virtually NO crime where I live now (very different from Vancouver) unless from another town or tourists, which are the main source of town income for 5 months a year.

It's too damn hot to lock up every night, plus when you go to the bar you don't have the embarrassment of pissing your pants while you frrantically dig for your keys.

I have also come hometo find a grirfriend in the kitchen, so there are benefits, but if some fat dude from the states is there one day,we will see just how well Canadians will defend their property. I would be helping aall the naysayers anyway by getting rid of this pest they find so hard to stifle.

As much I am one that will agree we should let nature take its course, in this case the whale is at greater risk of harm from us than we are from her, she is REALLY cute, as far as whales go too.

The problem with her becoming comfortable around humans and boats is that she will inevitably get hurt or killed by a propeller as she shows less and less concern when approaching boats. She is right in the middle of an EXTREMELY busy ferry crossing (two of then actualy) and also a major shipping routes so there are a LOT of boats that could kill her, not too mention what would happen if asmall craft ran into her in the straight, it could harm her AND the those who hit her.

I would like to see her returned to her pod, unfortunately the local natives feel that it is interfering, well as much as it is, it really isn't. They have an interest in showing her her pod but letting her deal with it herself and make her choices, she was left here for a year and a half and hasn't made any attempt to learn the neccesary skills to survive according to those that watch her.

I guess only time will tell now until they have a better solution. The naturalists here are extremely clever people, not just people screaming about saving the planet but people ACTING to help save the world around us that we KNOW we have a direct effect on. Sure we have the tree hugger radicals but they are not any part of the real preservation and habitat teams that do actually work for a living.

For the most part, it is really nice ot live somewhere surrounded by protected forests and protected wildlife, there are too many Weyerhauser clear cuts to remind us of how they used to treat our land. Now that they have been segragated to logging specific lands, which they (a US based firm)own, they have a little more respect for the trees they cut, knowing that they MUST rejuvenate the forest if they wish to remain in business, the rest of Vancouver Island is Pacific Rim National Park (breathtaking!) and other smaller protected forests such as cedar grove full of ancient protected redwoods.

I just can't get enough of this place.

But from your obvious reply you didn't see it.

Michael Moore, Ugly American
Filmmaker Taken to Task for Arrogance, Ignoring Israel

By Jefferson Morley
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 13, 2004; 10:30 AM

Michael Moore can handle verbal abuse from the conservative pundits in America, but harsh words from Pete Townshend, lead guitarist for The Who, may hit closer to his liberal heart.

"I greatly resent being bullied and slurred by him just because he didn't get what we wanted from me," Townshend told Ireland Online.

Moore wanted Townshend's rock anthem "Won't Get Fooled Again" for use on the soundtrack of his anti-Bush documentary film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." Townshend refused, saying he thought Moore's previous movies amounted to "bullying." In response, Townshend said that Moore accused him of being a war supporter. Townshend says Moore's attitude was evocative of President Bush's war on terrorism credo: if you're not with me, you're against me.

"It seems to me that this aspect of his nature is not unlike that of the powerful and willful man at the centre of his documentary," Townshend observed.

Ouch. As "Fahrenheit 9/11" is released into theaters around the world, Moore is beginning to face a new kind of criticism. On American talk radio, Moore may be denounced as practically anti-American. In the international online media, the pudgy filmmaker from Flint, Michigan, is often seen as all too American. He is more than occasionally described as a stereotypical "ugly American" -- overbearing to people of different cultures, oblivious to nuance, unsophisticated in politics and arrogant in temperament.

The most common substantive criticism is that he scants the role of Israel in the politics of the Iraq war.

But the criticism hasn't kept people from lining up at the box office. The opening day box office receipts broke the British record for a documentary, according to the Daily Telegraph of London.

The French attitude was evident in a droll dispatch in Le Monde about Moore's press conference for foreign reporters in New York last week. In front of 150 reporters, Moore dispensed political advice to the people of many nations.

He urged the British to vote out Prime Minister Tony Blair. He wished the Australians would dump Prime Minister John Howard.

"The chief of the Italian government, Silvio Berlusconi, was not forgotten by the filmmaker," the Parisian daily observed dryly.

"If I were an Italian citizen, I would have left the movie theater asking myself what in the world Berlusconi was doing by always hanging on to George W. Bush's coattails," Moore was quoted as saying. "It is embarrassing for Italy and the earlier there is regime change in Rome, the better."

Moore also had advice for the people of South Korea, according to the Seoul daily Chosun Ilbo.

"I hope Korean viewers start a social campaign against the dispatch of additional troops to Iraq," he said.

Moore was apparently unaware that South Koreans opposed to the U.S.-led war had started such a campaign more than a year ago and that it already enjoys substantial public support.

Simon Houpt of Toronto's Globe and Mail wrote Moore's advice "reflected a typically American arrogance -- his assumption that the war should be the primary issue for foreign voters simply because it's the primary issue for him."

To be sure, Moore's movie has overseas admirers. After all, the film did win the prestigious Palme d'Or at the Cannes international film festival.

"The genius of this most American of films is that it has turned politics into a blockbuster subject," wrote a reviewer in the Observer of London. "It's the first punk rock movie: it must have cost less to make than The Blair Witch Project, and yet he's managed to distill reality and come up with something more powerful."

Some of the criticism abroad echoes that heard in America, faulting Moore for intellectual incoherence and emotional exploitation. But other critics voiced arguments not often heard in the United States.

Emir Kusturica, a filmmaker from Sarajevo, told the Israeli daily Haaretz that he was not impressed by Moore's desire to defeat Bush.

"What is the difference between one American president and another?" aked Kusturica. "They're all really the same, they're all products of the media and they all declare that they want the same thing -- to do well by the people and bring peace to the Middle East."

The failure to talk about Israel is the biggest weakness of the film, said al-Jazeera.net.

The Qatar-based news site credited Moore with dramatizing "that democracy itself has been threatened by the Bush presidency" but faulted the film's emphasis on ties between the Bush family and Saudi Arabia.

"The implicit suggestion that the Saudi government is somehow driving the Bush administration's policies towards the region flies in the face of Washington's unprecedented support for Israel as well as strong regional opposition to the invasion of Iraq."

Hussein Ibish, a Washington-based commentator writing for the Daily Star in Beirut, Lebanon, said Moore ignored "the massive paper trail demonstrating a pre-existing agenda, which placed the overthrow of the Iraqi regime at the center of both US and Israeli policies."

Instead, Moore depicts "the malevolent influence of 'the Saudis,' a phrase that in the US is increasingly spat out with utter contempt, reminiscent of the tone reserved for 'the Jews' in anti-Semitic discourse, ascribing to millions of otherwise heterogeneous people the same menacing and hostile essence."

"Moore may or may not affect the election," Ibish concluded. "But he has certainly succeeding [sic] in bringing to a great many Americans the most powerful critique of US foreign policy they have ever heard, albeit one that rests on a bizarre and incoherent conspiracy theory and which confuses at least as much as it enlightens."

Isn't this guy Canadian?

Try here: https://www.techrepublic.com.com/5221-6239-0.html?tag=fdlink3

Your knowledge could be helping your fellowman and others understand your true colors instead of your comments.

For someone accusing America and her citizens of being arrogant, you sure showing your true colors by telling me I should be posting somewhere.

It's not a matter of where yo're posting. If you understood people the first time the point wouldn't be so easily lost.

This went WAAAY back you mae SO many false accusations and RUDE character judgements and yet you contribute NOTHING to TR outside just shooting your mouth off like a little kiddie.

Others here have and still do contribute a great dal to the TR Comunity by helping others with problems. In fact MOST just help others and don't even bother with discussions.

So the point is, put your money where your mouth is. You have lots to say and expect to be respected as a member of the TR IT community, yet you offer nothing to earn that respect, which your new American Idol Maxwell has a done thousandfold and thus earned the respect of many people here, unlike yourself.

Step up to the plate, you wanna be heard, you wanna have your opinions considered valid, PARTICIPATE, this is just a 'water cooler' for people to take a break without running into little kiddies, with big mouths and no point, that just want to shout out from mommy's basement.

You and Oz are two prim examples of why Hitler got so far before something gave ... Oh he isn't developing missile technology - and if so what do we care.. Oh he attacked this country - thats OK he doesn't want anymore - Oh he attacked that country - well he said he is done..

Remember those that do not learn from history are destend to repeat it... Do you want one of his nukes dropped on your home town ... then you would Say "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN!" -

I don't know were you are from - but I for one don't want his Nukes dropping anywhere in the world... and read the papers - NYT's - WP ... they all carry the WMD and Nuke stories - Nukes would of been functional in 6 months... Research and open your eyes...

Mr. Moore is a complete idiot. Who does he think he is trash talking the American people. Saddam killed a million of his own people and the world stood by and let him do it and they did nothing. He tried to take over Kuwait and we were the only ones who stopped him. I think Mr. Moore needs to go into combat and see what it's like to see oppressed people, living in poverty and fear, and then thank his lucky stars he is free and able to do what he wants. He has no clue on how it feels like to be living in constant danger. He needs to shut his mouth. I will not allow myself to support people who don't care about America or who blantantly spout off untruths on what this country was founded on - FREEDOM. Down with all idiots who support him!!!!!

"NA is now living in the same world as Europe has been for over 30 years." And our problems started from a weak knee'ed president call Wild Willie Clinton and his side kick Albert "I invented the Internet" Gore..

Under a strong leadership such as Ron Regan - USA and NA were safe - because the terrorists knew what would happen... Look how fast the Iran Hostages were released after Ron took office - days... prior was another weak leader Jimmy "Peanuts" Carter (smart man no guts)..

So why should I live in fear because you have for 30 years... If you leaders a weak - well then you will live in fear - and pray that the police will keep you safe... ah wrong -

I will never live in fear - I am the lion - I am the tiger - You can be the sheep - and the lamb - I will die but once - you will die a thousand times...

Americans will never live in fear - of another country - or terrorist ... we are a country of lions and tigers - only right now the sheep and the lambs were in control...

We were a pride of lions lead by two sheep - we are now a pride of lions lead by a tiger again... Go GWB... 4 More Years.. (we can only pray)..

You got to be nuts - live in fear like Europe has been for the past 30 years... what a mess of skirts - in 30 years all that talking with terrorist you have done - has accomplished nothing.

Ron Regan - got Iran hostages freed in 2 days after elections - Bombed and shut up Momar Kadoffe and his line of death..

So where has your terrorist arse kissing gotten you - more fear - how long 30 years... US will never live in fear - we aren't lambs for slater - we will die but one death... not the 30 years of death europe has been suffering ...

You are crazy to live like that for 30 years...

I never once stated that you should live like Europe, I just make a statement that NA is now living with the same fear that continues to rock Europe.

If you think that Regan was the sole reason that the Iranian Hostages were released you have been reading the wrong history books. Posts like yours scare the hell out of me; the pedestal that you are on is an optical illusion and is really smaller than you think it is. Being patriotic is one thing, and all the power to you. But, as the original post stated countries should learn from their mistakes and the US hasn?t. Stop backing puppet governments, and the leaders won?t turn around and bite your ass.

I never said that you should live in fear like Europe does, just that you are now living in fear like Europe does.

Again, what skewed recollection of history you have. Regan was not the SOLE reason the hostages were released.

OK, let me state that I am not European and I do not live in fear of terrorists. I am Canadian, and do not recall any external terrorist threats against our country ( some internal ones FLQ etc ). So, my terrorist arse kissing ( your words not mine ) has gotten us a lot. Being diplomats was as big a part of freeing the Iranian hostages as Regan was, but how quickly you forget??..

Either these two are one in the same, or they were separated at birth..

He's simply voicing his own opinion. You can tell him to shut up all he wants but it's his view, and many other ppl's view.
I went into the theatre and I liked the movie. It's entertaining at times, not extremely heavy into facts as I would like it to be, but much of what he's said echoes what I've already figured out. I agree with Moore and applaud him for standing up and questioning things when everyone else has simply followed blindly. Bush's reaction was more of a knee jerk reaction to the terrorist attacks. Seeing him sitting there in that Florida classroom on the morning of 9/11 like an idiot was just embarassing. It's even more uncomfortable to learn that he has such close ties with the Saudis and members of the Bin Ladens. The lesson learned is war is big business, terrorism was the excuse and 9/11 was the catalyst. Despite everything, lives have been lost already so we can bicker all we want. Doesn't matter anymore.

Multiple-personalities

From what I understand there is ON Ecountry in the entire world that has a NATIONAL THREAT METER, that would be the USA. Why the need for such a thing? In Canada it would never work anyway after not moving for 50 years.

My country doesn't have a national threat meter, I do not live with ANY fear at all except the terrorism that the USA has brought upon Noth America, as a country, Canada has nothing to fear.

Our Prim Minister has never said that we MAY, COULD, or WILL be attacked by anyone, nor have we been attacked (other than by the USA in the 19th century when they wanted a chunk of our land but we shooed them out of Canada pretty quickly. Well, the French and English that were in Canada at the time did).

The only thing Canadians have ever feared is GWB bringing terrorism or even worse, WWIII to North America, if we could float away we would, but the border is pretty deep and it's gonna be a big dig.

Now AMERICA on the other hand THRIVES and lives on fear. Fear of the Taliban, Fear of SADDAM, Fear of China's nukes, Fear of afro-americans, Fear of gangs, Fear of everything, if it wasn't for fear you wouldn't get your daily dose of adrenalin.

So look at yourselves before you start saying you don't fear anything. YOu thrive on it, monitor it and react to it with war as often as you can. I have lived in two continents and several countries, I have never sen anyone with the constant sense of lingering danger and fear that the USA does.

Keep your FEAR to yourselves, I have a life to live.

NK doesn't want to play happy families with the USA. THey have dropped out of the disarmourment agreements tand admitted to continuiong to build their neuclear strategy so that they can DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST A US INVASION.

NK has nukes, everyone knows it, they are developiong more and everyone knows it, they are planning on using them against US targets if needed, yet you invade the much weaker Iraq over SUSPECTED WMD that never showed up and hope that your point is made.

Do a little research on NK and the weapons grade plutonium they have been playing with for years now. Yuo have no idea how powerful this LITTLE country is, you brush it off with a shrug until GWB says you need to invade them.

I don't think my prediction was that far off and readong recent news shows it is even more inevitable than I predicted. Hop eyour soldiers don't get too comfortable between duties, GWB has some more fear to place on America yet..

You don't make a single ounce of sense at all, no matter how I reread and change grammar, it is absolute nonsense and make no point or counterpoint, it's just...well here's my reply then.

In fact, if the trees saw crazy Skipper flying on Pink Floyd's pig it would hurl the world into outer space!! Then the Mushroom flavoured M&M's would need to go skating because it's Grant's Birthday party in Februmarch. Sometime after it starts, we will buy as many golf balls for our lunch with Pokemon that we won't need to eat for at least three years.

I know Canadian's (dual citizens living in Canada) that vote by mail for US elections. It isn't that far fetched that a dumb lawyer would overlook a loophole that favours his goals in another area.

I can and will find out though, like I said, I have a very good and reliable source to confirm such a statement when he returns to Canada.

Went to a journalism seminar many years ago.

There are a few elements to slander and libel - it has to not only be untrue, but known to the utterer as untrue, and have malicious intent - the burden of proof is with the defense to prove the lack of truth and the intent. There has to be damage - could can't slander Saddam Husein in the US because you can argue he doesn't have any good reputation to be damaged. This is Canadian Law but I know the US standard is similar.

As for politicians and celebrities, there is a slightly adjusted standard as they are involved in the public eye on an ongoing basis. A landmark case had a political cartoonist portraying a politician pulling the wings off an insect in a sadistic manner - the argument that public figures could not sue was found to be wanting - but the standard is higher.

In Canada, politicians cannot be sued for what is said during debate in the house of commons - but once they step out of the chamber, anything they say can be held against them in libel and slander cases - making for some interesting press scrums.

I don't think MM is a nice guy. Sometimes he is funny. I would not describe him as a journalist - he doesn't have the discipline or the ethics.

James

Wow thats amazing that you spin this into "NK using nukes to defend themselves". My point is and I think Bush should do this (whether he will or not I dunno) is NOT bother with NK. Its not our problem. IF they attack one of our cities/nuke one of our cities, then we will go and take them out. Until then we won't bother. Again, have fun dealing with them. Its not our problem.

Michael Moore calls his presentations 'Documentarys', but they not really. They are political hate mongering propeganda to promote Left-Wing assertions that everyone else is irresponsible. The exagerrated paradoys are not amusing except to those who already agree with him.
I didn't agree with the premises before, and the so-called "Documentary" offered no facts to convince me otherwise. It is, however, carefully offensive and demeaning - I'll bet Osama loves it !
I am glad that G W Bush aparently does not believe that the U.S.A. is a Subject of the U.N. (after all over 70% of U.N. delegates are from dictatorships, and many that aren't have no willingness to back up their own resolutions with any real authority or force). As a Veteran, I remember swearing allegiance to the Consititution and to "Protect my Country" - nothing about checking to make sure France or Germany or China agreed before accepting lawful orders. However, I do wish that we would make some more aggressive moves against Syria (Home of the Terrorists)...and I appreciate he troops who are fighting for Order and Security against an enemy that completely disregards the Geneva Convention (which applies to Uniformed Soldiers, who are clear about operating with support from a specific nation, would not kidnap, assisinate or mutilate while photographing to distribute the atrocities and would not intentionally take combat to civilians).
Osama Bin Laden, if captured alive, would be treated with much more respect and fairness than he allows his intended victims, he and his followers are mis-prounouncing their Master's name: it's not propounced "Allah", but rather is "Satan" or perhaps "Lucifer".
"By his fruits we shall know him".

That's my opinion (or should I claim "Documentary" ?)

:D
B-)

.
From our last one-on-one discussion, and you know what I mean, you seem to be doing the very thing you suggested we not do. Is your memory that short, or are you going to continue your games.

You need to learn when to shut your mouth, and open your ears instead. You just might learn something.

No, as I said, I'm not going there; this is simply a "gentle reminder".

This post was prior to my reading your email so therfore it does not apply.

As for the information provided, I made many statements that I believe to be true and that is what I have read and headr in the days leading up to the war.

The m,ost important point is that the original post was about how we KNEW Saddam had Neuclear power, which is the very first I have ever heard of such an insane statement. Saddam couldn;t even launch an attack acros the paciic, yet alone a neuclear war, that's just ridiculous as i am positive you will agree.

Can you imagine the flame if I had said saddam had nukes and you knew it?

But my point is that the same poster had sugested what a minimal country NK would be to overthrow. Yet Saddam had nukes. Whereas I am sure you know very well, NK HAS nukes and are prepared to use them as defense against an American invasion, I think I posted that link yesterday or emailed it to someone.

Saddam hasn't even been proven to still have WMD, he said he destroyed them, the UN and now the American military still haven't found existing WMD. So can we then accept the fact that Saddam does NOT have nukes ready to target America? I would think so, and it's not absurd in any way for me to suggest they don't, is it?

Again, I posted this befre reading your email and replying to you.

here's some mroe info on the issues. Note, Canada has made no sanctions against NK, Canada has not been asking them to stop nuclear testing.
Canada is not part of this issue, yet you want US to deal with what YOU deem is a problem?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/northkorea/

This whole page is full of links regarding this issue for you to read up on if you have any interest, I think you should if you are concerned about Saddam and safety in America.

It is provided by PBS, it is a very nonbiased and accurate report based on several news agencies reports and key participants between the nations involved.

here's some mroe info on the issues. Note, Canada has made no sanctions against NK, Canada has not been asking them to stop nuclear testing.
Canada is not part of this issue, yet you want US to deal with what YOU deem is a problem?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/northkorea/

This whole page is full of links regarding this issue for you to read up on if you have any interest, I think you should if you are concerned about Saddam and safety in America.

It is provided by PBS, it is a very nonbiased and accurate report based on several news agencies reports and key participants between the nations involved.

Ok first of all PBS is NOT a nonbiased outlet, lol. Everytime you post these ludicrous statements I wonder how much you really know. But having said that, I really don't care about Canada. Canada does what Canada does..why are you mentioning that country in this thread?? I certainly haven't.

Second of all, my point was North Korea was not and hopefully is not going to be our problem. Since YOU compalain that we meddle our noses into other people's business (which I partially agree) I said we should and hopefully will stay out of it, if and when there are tensions in southeast Asia. Australia, Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, should be leading (I don't care which country) this issue, not the US. I and many Americans I have spoken to prefer this. Its not our business.

How many times do you need me to repeat this?