Michael Moore makes me want to puke and anyone who sees this trash should be ashamed.

[dude1394]

Article published Jun 30, 2004
Sept. 11 witness says Moore's film insults victims of the attacks

'From Here to Eternity." Tora, Tora, Tora." "In Harm's Way." These are three films made about Pearl Harbor. There have been more than 20 films made about Pearl Harbor, and over 200 films made about World War II. These films inspire patriotism, courage, and nationalism. They tell us about the honor and bravery of the soldiers and the nation that supported them. Two and a half years after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the world watched American forces fight on D-Day. Two and a half years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the world is watching Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Moore's film is the first major motion picture about Sept. 11, 2001. This bears repeating. When future generations look back on the Sept. 11 massacre, their first impression, through the medium of film, will be a work in which the president and the government are blamed for the attacks, and the soldiers who are protecting this country are defamed. Instead of a film version of Lisa Beamer's book, "Let's Roll," or Richard Picciotto's "Last Man Down," we are presented with this fallacy. How could this happen?

It would be a colossal insult to insinuate that Franklin D. Roosevelt or the U.S. government were in any way responsible for the attacks on Pearl Harbor. Can you imagine the indignation of the men and women who lived during that period?

"Fahrenheit 9/11" is indicative of a nation that has become too apathetic, ignorant or deceived to face the enemy at the gate. America, where is your fury?

On Sept. 11, 2001, I stood across the Hudson River, watching the Twin Towers burn, knowing that if the plane had struck at 9:46 a.m. instead of 8:46 a.m., I would be dead. As a survivor and witness to the attack on the World Trade Center, I am more than insulted by this film. I am outraged. This film is based on conjecture, hearsay and propaganda. At a time when this country desperately needs to rally in support of our brave soldiers and our strong leaders, Moore is content to spread discord and divisiveness. The base of his argument is that the Bush administration had strong ties with the bin Laden family. However, sound facts are conspicuously absent from this "documentary."

The 9/11 commission did not indict President Bush. According to the report, the president's actions before, during and after the attacks are fully justified, including the military action in Iraq. The commission did not find a direct link between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. A similar commission in the 1940s would not have found a direct link between Hitler's Germany and the attack on Pearl Harbor. In both instances, the threat was imminent; the president and the military acted decisively.

Could we have been more prepared for a terrorist attack on Sept. 10, 2001? Certainly. Could we have been more prepared for an attack on Dec. 6, 1941? Most definitely. In the weeks and months following Pearl Harbor, there were reports and criticisms that the government and military should have been more prepared. The difference is that the people of the nation did not waste a lot of time pointing fingers at each other. Rather, they unified and engaged the enemy head-on. I guess that is why we call them "The Greatest Generation." How will future generations refer to us?

So, how do we explain Moore's film to future generations? I wonder. More than that, I wonder how I would explain this film to Nancy D., Jerome N. or Heather H. I am sure you don't know their names, but their faces haunt me day and night. How would I explain to them that a film was made accusing the president and vilifying the soldiers, the same president and soldiers who are attempting to avenge their murders and protect other citizens. Moore has not only insulted the nation, he has insulted the victims of the terrorist attacks.

During his acceptance speech at the Oscars, Moore said, "Shame on you, Mr. Bush." Well, I say, "Shame on you, Michael Moore." Shame on everyone who supports this travesty of a film. Shame on a society that allows this sham of a film. You have weakened the nation.

[Mavdog]

I don't know of this will aid in stopping your Moore-orexic problem. seems mixing politics with entertainment is a hit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Fahrenheit' May Be Boon for Charities
NEW YORK (July 3) - Charities could be among the biggest winners from the box-office success of the anti-Bush documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11," according to a published report.

The Wall Street Journal reported that about 60 percent of the net profit ultimately generated by the film could go to charities yet to be identified by Walt Disney Co.

The movie by liberal filmmaker Michael Moore had been financed by Disney unit Miramax, but the media conglomerate declined to release the picture, which is critical of the Bush administration and its efforts against terrorism, saying it did not want to take such a partisan position during an election year. So Disney sold the distribution rights back to Miramax's chiefs, brothers Harvey and Bob Weinstein.

The Journal reported that under terms of the agreement to sell the film rights, the Weinsteins could get roughly the same 40 percent of the profits that they would have received if it had stayed with Miramax. The other 60 percent will go to Disney, and the conglomerate stated earlier that it would donate any profits it sees to charities.

The film has been a box-office success, setting a record for the best U.S. ticket sales by a documentary in its first weekend in theaters. It is also the first documentary to be the top movie at U.S. theaters as it took in $21.8 in its first three days.

The Journal estimates that the film will eventually produce tens of millions of dollars of profits for charities. Disney told the paper that no charities had yet been identified for donations.

07-04-04 09:55 EDT

[reeds]

I saw this "trash", and I am far from ashamed.. Good flick...WOW..i guess a good chunk of America should be ashamed then?? Its doing well at the box office...

[dude1394]

Its doing well at the box office...

Much to the shame of the anti-american, black chopper left

[Max Power]

Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD release date set

Director Michael Moore is so eager to oust American President George Bush from the White House, he's already scheduled the DVD release of his documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 for September.

The controversial Bush-bashing documentary is currently at the top of the American box office after it reaped in an impressive debut tally of $21.8m (€17.9m).

And Moore is working towards getting the DVD version of the film ready before the November presidential elections.

He says: "We want to get it out before the election. We hope the film and DVD will have a significant role in removing Bush."

[Epitome22]

Wow, Fahrenheit 9/11 doesen't slow down.

It made 21 million in it's second weekend, equal to what it made in it's opening weekend....It's total tally is now $60 million bucks. It'll break $200 million easily. It just opened in 500 more theatres. Once it gets overseas, it will blow the proverbial roof off.

I've seen it 3 times now.

[Drbio]

I'm surprised Moore hasn't identified 9/11 as his release date. He is worthless.

[reeds]

great news...the world must know the truth

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: reeds
great news...the world must know the truth

We already know the truth about you, reeds.

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: Epitome22
I've seen it 3 times now.

You really need to get a life.

[dude1394]

These are the folks lining up to see Michael Moores anti-american screed.

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Robert Jamieson

Veteran gets rude welcome on Bainbridge

Friday, July 9, 2004

By ROBERT L. JAMIESON JR.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

Think about the Seattle area -- Bainbridge Island to be exact -- and you think scenic views and liberal-minded tolerance.
At least the killer views are still there.

The bucolic island's deep reputation for civility got a gut check this week during the annual Grand Old Fourth of July celebration.

That's when Jason Gilson, a 23-year-old military veteran who served in Iraq, marched in the local event. He wore his medals with pride and carried a sign that said "Veterans for Bush."
Walking the parade route with his mom, younger siblings and politically conservative friends, Jason heard words from the crowd that felt like a thousand daggers to the heart.
"Baby killer!"
"Murderer!"
"Boooo!"
To understand why the reaction of strangers hurt so much, you must read what the young man had written in a letter from Iraq before he was disabled in an ambush:

"I really miss being in the states. Some of the American public have no idea how much freedom costs and who the people are that pay that awful price. I think sometimes people just see us as nameless and faceless and not really as humans. ... A good portion of us are actually scared that when we come home, for those of us who make it back, that there will be protesters waiting for us and that is scary."

On the Fourth, Jason faced his worst fear.
It was such a public humiliation -- home front insult after battlefield injury.
It really shouldn't have happened for two principal reasons.

Reason No. 1? History.
The past informs us that the men and women who fight our wars are not just following orders.
They are risking life and limb.
When they return from the battlefield they should be embraced regardless of the public popularity about the conflict, regardless of the politics.
Have we so quickly forgotten the painful lessons of Vietnam?

Frederick Scheffler, whose daughter and son-in-law marched with Jason on Sunday, hasn't.
Scheffler -- an Army veteran of two tours in Southeast Asia -- was shot in the leg during that long-ago conflict.

He came home with a cane, only to discover the American public was either indifferent to his sacrifice or downright hostile.
"I didn't think in this day and age combat veterans would be treated in this manner," Scheffler, 60, tells me, reflecting on Jason. "I saw it happen to veterans in Vietnam. I'm not going to let it happen today, not to these kids."

Reason No. 2? The rules.
The Bainbridge Island Chamber of Commerce, which put on the community celebration, permits freedom of expression at the event but asks that parade announcers not act in a manner that is partisan or prejudicial.
Jason's mother, Tamar, says a female parade announcer locked eyes on her son who was walking behind a pro-Republican group called Women in Red, White and Blue. The group supports President Bush and the troops in the fight against terrorism.

According to Tamar, the female announcer sarcastically asked Jason: "And what exactly are you a veteran of?"
The perceived mocking, the mother adds, set off some people in the crowd, loosing a flood of negative comments, "like a wave... a mob-style degrading."
Kevin Dwyer, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke with the announcer after the allegations reached him this week.
He says the woman denies using sarcasm; she just wanted to know which war Jason was a veteran of so that she could "honor him" in public.
"It wasn't her intention to incite anything -- that's what she told me," Dwyer said. "But if she acted out of school, that's not what we're about."

Dwyer added: "I believe (Jason's) mom when she said her son was called 'a murderer.' But I'm sure it wasn't so much directed at the kid as it was the president. A soldier with a sign represents that."
The female announcer told Dwyer that some in the Bush-Cheney contingent in the parade seemed "militant."
And so, battle lines are drawn.

From the outside looking in, the fuel for this conflict seems obvious.
The left-leaning island hosted a group of people who support Bush's controversial war. (On the same parade route, people bearing pro-Kerry signs were cheered and applauded for, among other things, tooling around in an environmentally responsible car.)

Against such a roiling backdrop, an unfortunate tone of voice or the wording on a sign can spark, well, something -- something unconscionable it appears.

But less obvious factors are undoubtedly at work here, too.

The female announcer at the parade had a father who fought for America in a previous U.S. conflict. He never made it back home.
Jason's mother -- unbeknownst to many observers along the parade route -- is a tireless activist behind the pro-troops movement in the Puget Sound region.
Such a combo on a day of red, white and blue can only lead to fireworks -- snap, crackle and popping off during what locals call the "best small-town parade in America."

P-I columnist Robert L. Jamieson Jr. can be reached at 206-448-8125 or robertjamieson@seattlepi.com

© 1998-2004 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

[madape]

Here's the poster Moore is using to promote F/911 in Europe. What a patriot.

[dude1394]

Looks like his dream. You are known by the company you keep.

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: madape


Here's the poster Moore is using to promote F/911 in Europe. What a patriot.

Since when does anyone care what Europeans think? Moore is such a doofus... the opinion of European people will not and should not have any effect on the outcome of this year's vote.

[dude1394]

I just finished a movie that is the antithesis of the hate-mongering Michael Moore's "documentary". Based on a true story. Dude says check it out. Not happy, but pretty damn wonderful stuff.

Plot Summary for
Guys, The (2002)

Adapted from a stage play by Anne Nelson, a drama centering on a slice of the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy. Nick, a fire captain, who lost eight men in the collapse of the World Trade Center, enlists help from an editor, Joan, to prepare their eulogies. Nick builds a relationship with Joan, who helps him put together the difficult, heartfelt speeches that he must deliver with honor, humor and poise--all the while, navigating his way through his own emotional response.

The Guys

[reeds]

BREAKS ANOTHER RECORD!!!!!!!!

Fahrenheit 9/11 breaks box office records in Britain

Mon Jul 12, 9:30 AM ET


LONDON (AFP) - The prize-winning polemical "Fahrenheit 9/11" which savagely attacks US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) for the war in Iraq (news - web sites) has smashed box office for a documentary in Britain.


The movie has taken 1.3 million pounds (2 million euros, 2.4 million dollars) since its release on Friday -- the biggest opening weekend for a documentary.

Britain's previous highest opening weekend for a documentary was set by Moore's last film "Bowling for Columbine" which took 158,000 pounds in its first three days.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" now looks almost certain set to become Britain's highest grossing documentary, overtaking the record currently held by mountaineering film "Touching the Void", which took 2.58 million pounds.

It is also the hottest cinema ticket in France, where it opened on Wednesday.

Its success in Europe is mirroring that which the documentary has already recorded in the United States, where it has been playing to packed theatres since June 25.

[MavKikiNYC]

Clearly, Michael Moore has elevated the level of political discourse among "artists".

Let the backlash begin.

Rap hit asks 'Why W knocked down towers'

BY DAVID HINCKLEY
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER


Yonkers rapper Jadakiss is busting up the charts with a song charging President Bush was a Sept. 11 conspirator.
"Why did Bush knock down the towers?" asks the song "Why?", which comprises several dozen questions on subjects ranging from Kobe Bryant to the new $20 bills.

"Why?" jumped from No.33 to No.16 on the national Billboard charts last week, with a corresponding rise in controversy.

The conspiracy-theory Bush line is not seen in the video on MTV. The line also has been removed by many radio stations around the country, though both major hip-hop stations in New York play the full version and say they have heard no complaints.

"I didn't even know there was an edited version," said Tracy Cloherty, program director of WQHT-FM (97.1), which played "Why?" 54 times last week. "If ["Fahrenheit 9/11" director] Michael Moore is entitled to his opinion, why not Jadakiss?"

"He's just exercising his freedom of speech," said Michael Saunders, program director of WWPR-FM (105.1), which played "Why?" 26 times. "There's no reason to edit the line out."

The 29-year-old Jadakiss took a shot last week at stations that do, saying, "They're censoring me all over the place and that's good. It means I'm reaching everybody."

While Republicans and talk-radio hosts attacked the line, local music fans yesterday seemed largely unconcerned.

"His opinion is that of the 'hood," said Chuck Black, 24, who works at Ali CD's on W. 125th St. "As far as us 'black folks,' we're not offended by it."

[kingrex]

Everyone who watches this film should go in knowing from which direction Moore is speaking from. Take it with a grain of salt and accept it as his right to speak his mind. It isn't a "travesty" it is one man's opinion. I realize Moore hyperbolizes fact to make his points, but that's all it is. The only thing that "weakens the country" is any attempt to censor this guy. Having the freedom to state our opinion (no matter how much they dissent from others) is what makes this country great. Even if that opinion comes from a guy like Moore.

[Evilmav2]

Jadakiss is a poor excuse for a rapper, but he has certainly shown a strong penchant for opportunism.

Jada first came to prominance as a member of "The Lox" back in 1997, when that subpar group jumped on the Biggie Smalls tribute train and recorded their first hit, "We'll Always Love Big Poppa." The fact that Jadakiss and "The Lox" hadn't really had anything to do with Biggie Smalls while the rotund drug dealer was alive didn't matter much to an MTV programming staff looking for more Biggie tribute material to play after Biggies' death, and consequently that "Lox" track was put on high rotation on MTV and it helped to put Jada and "The Lox" on that viacom map.

A couple of years back Jada released his solo debut, "Kiss tha Game Goodbye", which seemed to me to be a pretty crummy impression of a CashMoney-style rims and ice release, but it sold pretty decently. In this album, Jada raps like a mumbler with marbles in his mouth, and he shows his strong penchant to rhyme dated and unoriginal lyrics- In my opinion the guy just isn't that talented.

Now, with his latest release, "Kiss of Death", Jada has decided that he has a social and political conscience, and he wants to share it with all of us less enlightened folks... At different points in his new CD (I downloaded a full rip of it), he maunders on about racism, life in the "Ghetto" (He sounds a bit out of touch and trite when rambling on with his stock complaints about living in the "Ghetto"- When was the last time you lived, much less visited a low income area Jada?), and his new anti-Bush themes.

Again, I may be wrong, but when I see MTV and MTV2 pumping "choose or lose" anti-Bush commercials on every second commercial break, I can't help but think that Jadakiss is showing some acumen in deciding to release material that includes moronic charges that Bush "knocked the towers down", and that he is a war criminal for invading Iraq. MTV and BET have put his track "Why" on heavy rotation, and that should certainly help to sell a great many of his albums (Kiss is a pretty shitty album in my opinion) to the young and stupid who take the MTV video rotation to be a good sign of what good music is.

Additionally, the dude has been collaborating with comic-commercial rappers like 50 Cent (Jada is himself a comic-commercial rapper), and he's been wearing G-Unit hats and shirts. This may not seem like that much of an inditement to the casual rap fan, but wearing 50's G-Unit stuff is not the kind of thing that any self-respecting rapper should do casually (Do you hear me Lil Flip of Houston?)...

Anyway, just to restate, I think Jadakiss is a pretty shitty rapper who has always had a good sense for being able to produce tracks that will be radio and MTV friendly. He did it by making a contrived Biggie Smalls tribute with "The Lox", he did it with his New Orleans-style bling album, "Kiss tha Game Goodbye", and he is doing it today with his inane, MTV-friendly political babbles on "Kiss of Death"...

[MavsfaninDenton]

Some of you guys are idiots, if you want to eat up the BS the media gives you go ahead. But at least watch the movie before you bash it. If you watched it you would have a hard time discrediting it.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally posted by: MavsfaninDenton
Some of you guys are idiots, if you want to eat up the BS the media gives you go ahead. But at least watch the movie before you bash it. If you watched it you would have a hard time discrediting it.

This guy does not represent intelligent liberals.

[MavsfaninDenton]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

This guy does not represent intelligent liberals.

Come on! What did I say that was so stupid? I will tell you this, I have heard all of these people talk about how the movie is full of lies, yet they haven't even seen the movie!!! I am definitely not un-informed. You want some sources for all of the facts presented in the movie? www.michaelmoore.com
BTW, how many documentaries have you seen that were not made to represent the beliefs of the director? There aren't many.

[Mavs_Rook]

I have seen the movie and some facts are just facts. Bush lovers will cry to the last drop to deny that. But even if the movie is 10% right about Bush, then this liar should be kicked out of the white house.

I am no Kerry fan and not that i am a democrat. but i hate bush like anything. This liar telling lies and killing those young American in the foreign soil. Die for Iraq? for what? lies all based on lies.

This movie may be not overtly truth, but once again, America needs a president who speaks truth, not like clinton or Bush. but Bush is worse, he is causing Americans to die and he says "bring it on". I bet he will wet his pants as he steps that desert soil. Not by going there in thanksgiving for some photo opportunity with a fake turkey.

and speaking of conservatism, i dont know my friend - when is that we have conservative value to have largest deficit?? when we say less govet, but we can break privacy all together by so called "patriot act", when we stop gay marriage with ban and deny civil rights to the people who are not like us?? oh, that looks like less govt? or is this conservative value? they are playing politics with us in the south with value cos in the south, we act like we are doing all the right things by "talking" about value. to hell with value, when the party who preaches value wants to go to war, so that one rich buddy can give "no bid" contarct to Haliburton to gain in $$$$.

i just hope people in south would be little more wise to see what this bush-cheney doing for their rich buddies at the expense of American lifes and money.

For the record: YES! i am proud to be an AMERICAN. some repulican tried to coined people as "unpatriotic" when they dont like Bush. like Bush wrote the Bible on Patriotism. We live in a country where if president have sex with someone, we become very interested and angry at him cos he lied, cos we all love to hear hot sex stuff. But we dont care when some president take our young souls to the war at the name of war on terror, by keeping them in fear. I am not denying we are not in danger, infact we are and always will be becos of our foreign policies, but dont think we are fighting the right war at the right place.

Saddam was bad man! never deny that. but i can name more than dozen dictators in the whole world who are more cruel to his people that Saddam was. but American doesnt wanna go there in Africa to deal with Aids striken people!! they want Saddam cos it would be easier to make American people digest the idea that "Saddam and a middle east muslim country" is our enemy with "imminent" threat! Sadly, he has succeeded at that.

Binladen is in Afghanistan!!! And America by the grace of GOD is the best in technology in the whole world. NASA claims they can spot a tennis ball from outer space if they want to with their technology. But they cant find a 6 foot + guy running in the Afghan desert???? this is absurd. we are in the wrong war people. My nephew died in Afganishtan 11 monthes back, that time we thought he was fighting the real war, bringing the main culprit in justice. Now, soldiers in Afganistan are forgotten. Now Iraq is the main issue, that had nothing to do with 9/11.

I am saying all this, cos i had, have and will have relatives in the Army. i just hope they would take the gun to kill other people only when it keeps America safe and if they die we can be proud too as we mourn. And for his poltical gain in election time, doing all the things that i hate to the gut.

[MavKikiNYC]

Binladen is in Afghanistan!!!

Amazing. Where? Precisely.

Wait. He's already in custody, right? To be trotted out in late October?

Oh the thrill of it.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally posted by: kingrex
Everyone who watches this film should go in knowing from which direction Moore is speaking from. Take it with a grain of salt and accept it as his right to speak his mind. It isn't a "travesty" it is one man's opinion. I realize Moore hyperbolizes fact to make his points, but that's all it is. The only thing that "weakens the country" is any attempt to censor this guy. Having the freedom to state our opinion (no matter how much they dissent from others) is what makes this country great. Even if that opinion comes from a guy like Moore.

The real travesty is that so many people are walking away from the movie thinking it's "truth".
The real travesty is that people are willing to base such an important opinion on something that may be "10 percent truth".
It's a friggin travesty that hate and hypocrisy has become the center of the political platform on the liberal left.
What weakens the country is letting a self-indulgent nutball like Michael Moore define your political movement.

[reeds]

Mavs_Rook....what can I say- that was AWESOME!!!!!

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally posted by: reeds
Mavs_Rook....what can I say- that was AWESOME!!!!!

Only you, Reeds, could read it.

[reeds]

"Only you, Reeds, could read it."


No, I am certain there are a few more people in here that would appreciate a great post like that...

[MavericksfanDenton]

Originally posted by: Usually Lurkin

The real travesty is that so many people are walking away from the movie thinking it's "truth".
The real travesty is that people are willing to base such an important opinion on something that may be "10 percent truth".
It's a friggin travesty that hate and hypocrisy has become the center of the political platform on the liberal left.
What weakens the country is letting a self-indulgent nutball like Michael Moore define your political movement.

What weakens the country is letting a self-indulgent nutball like Michael Moore define your political movement.

As opposed to letting self-indulgent nutballs like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, or Ann Coulter define a political movement? Not to mention GWB and Dick Hicks Cheney.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: MavsfaninDenton

Come on! What did I say that was so stupid? I will tell you this, I have heard all of these people talk about how the movie is full of lies, yet they haven't even seen the movie!!! I am definitely not un-informed. You want some sources for all of the facts presented in the movie? www.michaelmoore.com
BTW, how many documentaries have you seen that were not made to represent the beliefs of the director? There aren't many.

What did you say that was so stupid? Well the you mentioning all the people who haven't seen Farenheit 911 who have criticized it as if that point means something would be pretty stupid IMO. There are tons on books, TV shows, news articles, etc. which are criticized by many, and with good reason, without most of the people criticizing the work having viewed or heard it. Take Mein Kampf for example. There is no reason to read this book to know that it is full of lies and propaganda. Why waste your time. You don't always have to sift through every piece of garbage in the dumpster to determine that it is garbage, the smell alone will usually let you know.

As for documentaries, most try extremely hard to be both accurate and objective in there presentation of the facts. Yes, knowing that all directors are human, we can rightly assume that most if not all documentaries fail to meet these measures in at least some small way. However, I've never heard of a director you so casually threw in knowing lies and deciets as Moore does. Also it appears that Moore made almost no visible attempt to be objective. He takes the approach that whatever the means it is justified by the end. I personally have never seen this extreme of an approach or anything like it in documentaries.

Now as to www.michaelmoore.com, that's like going to the GOP headquarters to get information about who you should vote for. They have a vested interest to only give you one side of the story. Or maybe you could go to the KKK headquarters to get information on how to treat minorities in the workplace. If Moore isn't objective in his film, then why on earth would he be objective on his web site? This line of reasoning is inane beyond belief.

[PlanoJ]

Originally posted by: LRB

What did you say that was so stupid? Well the you mentioning all the people who haven't seen Farenheit 911 who have criticized it as if that point means something would be pretty stupid IMO. There are tons on books, TV shows, news articles, etc. which are criticized by many, and with good reason, without most of the people criticizing the work having viewed or heard it. Take Mein Kampf for example. There is no reason to read this book to know that it is full of lies and propaganda. Why waste your time. You don't always have to sift through every piece of garbage in the dumpster to determine that it is garbage, the smell alone will usually let you know.

As for documentaries, most try extremely hard to be both accurate and objective in there presentation of the facts. Yes, knowing that all directors are human, we can rightly assume that most if not all documentaries fail to meet these measures in at least some small way. However, I've never heard of a director you so casually threw in knowing lies and deciets as Moore does. Also it appears that Moore made almost no visible attempt to be objective. He takes the approach that whatever the means it is justified by the end. I personally have never seen this extreme of an approach or anything like it in documentaries.

Now as to www.michaelmoore.com, that's like going to the GOP headquarters to get information about who you should vote for. They have a vested interest to only give you one side of the story. Or maybe you could go to the KKK headquarters to get information on how to treat minorities in the workplace. If Moore isn't objective in his film, then why on earth would he be objective on his web site? This line of reasoning is inane beyond belief.

To criticize anything you have to know something about it. Yeah Hitler was a nutbar and one of the most evil men on the face of the earth. But I wouldn't know where to begin criticizing Mein Kampf as I haven't read it. MavsFanInDenton is right. You do have to see something to be able to accurately criticize it. Quoting secondary sources without any understanding of the primary source is a falicy all too often duplicated in today's media. One of the leading critics of the movie, Bill O'Reily didn't watch the whole thing. He walked out in the middle of the movie but yet states that the entire thing is a lie. How would he know. Also which parts of it are a lie. I saw the movie and agree that the presentation was slanted but the facts are facts. They were well backed up and checked by fact finders. Explain anything from the movie that was a lie.

[dude1394]

I'd be glad to see it if someone pays my way. I'll not give a penny to someone who hates america like moore. Nor will woody allen, tim robbins, dixie chicks, france, germany etc. get my bucks willingly.

But I also think that you don't have to see animal porn to have an opinion on it either.

I think I'll edit that.. I "might" see it. I'm not sure if it's worth wasting three hours of my life. On second thought I'll pass.

[PlanoJ]

Good to see that you're so open minded Dude. The French and Germans suck because they didn't support us in Iraq (nor did most of the rest of the world), and you are too busy to go see the movie which you had plenty of time to read articles about and bash.

[dude1394]

Hmm....Really....Like to list the rest of the world that didn't support us?

Maybe just list the rest of the world that actively tried to thrawt us? Exactly when HAS france acted like an ally anyway.

Being open minded is one thing, being unprincipled is quite another.

[PlanoJ]

Originally posted by: dude1394
Hmm....Really....Like to list the rest of the world that didn't support us?

Every country who isn't in the "Mother of all Coalitions" (and really those that don't have soldiers or at lest some sort of support on the ground). Here's a link on the coalition and it's current state and below kind of a summary of he is the rest of the world that doesn't support us:

Link

So the list of countries in the coalition and the number of people they have there is: UK - 7500, Italy 3120, Poland 2400, Ukraine - 1650, Netherlands - 1400, Romania - 800, South Korea 600, Japan 600, Denmark - 520, Bulgari 485, Thailand 450, El Salvador 380, Hungary 300, Australia 250, Georgia 159, Norway 155, Azerbaijan 150, Mongolia (didn't know they were a country) 140, Portugal 110, Latvia 122, Czech Republic 113, Slovakia 105, Albania 70, New Zealand 60, Estonia 40, Tonga 45, Phillipines 43, Singapore 33, Kazakstan 29, Macedonia 28, Moldova 12. Total - 21974.

Now for a list of countries not in the coalition in alphabetical order: Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovinia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Cote d'Ivorie, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, East Timor, (i'm getting tired so we are going to just major countries), Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, North Korea, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Turkey,

Maybe just list the rest of the world that actively tried to thrawt us? Exactly when HAS france acted like an ally anyway.

France was our most important Ally in the American Revolution. They sold us Louisiana. They fougth with us in both world wars and Vietnam. Most of the Middle East, Turkey (a member of NATO) denied us fly over rights. Saudi Arabia denied us the use of our own military bases as staging grounds.

Being open minded is one thing, being unprincipled is quite another.

What exactly are the principles of the current administration?

[dude1394]

We also went to war with france in 1812. Not exactly a lot of help in either ww's either, at leat the jewish folks wouldn't say so. But okay.... They are currently acting directly against our foreign policy and are acting more enemy than ally. Germany I might give a pass on as they seem just confused as much as anything and are helping in afghanistan but they decided to make their stand and they can live with it.

To be honest I was talking about personal principles. You know like I wouldn't write a check the moveon.org, or as I mentioned see a woody allen movie. Although I hear they are quite funny.

You got me on the list of countries and I probably should have said significant. It is one thing to not be in the coalition but quite another imo to actively lobby campaign against us.
Even china/russia didn't actively oppose us like the french/germans.

[dude1394]

Hmmm....Here's another list of the "coalition". I've included a link and would like to see yours if you don't mind. It seems that there are some that are on this list but not yours??
Possibly some have not given troops but support the coalition nonetheless.


[l=coalition]http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/news/20030327-10.html[/quote]

Who are the current coalition members?

President Bush is assembling a Coalition that has already begun military operations to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction, and enforce 17 UNSC resolutions.

The Coalition will also liberate the Iraqi people from one of the worst tyrants and most brutal regimes on earth.

Contributions from Coalition member nations range from: direct military participation, logistical and intelligence support, specialized chemical/biological response teams, over-flight rights, humanitarian and reconstruction aid, to political support.

Forty-nine countries are publicly committed to the Coalition, including:

Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Tonga
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

This number is still growing, and it is no accident that many member nations of the Coalition recently escaped from the boot of a tyrant or have felt the scourge of terrorism. All Coalition member nations understand the threat Saddam Hussein's weapons pose to the world and the devastation his regime has wreaked on the Iraqi people.

* The population of Coalition countries is approximately 1.23 billion people.
* Coalition countries have a combined GDP of approximately $22 trillion.
* Every major race, religion, ethnicity in the world is represented.
* The Coalition includes nations from every continent on the globe.

[PlanoJ]

The link in my post goes to the article I was quoting. It's from the July 15th Washington Post page A01. The list of countries not in the coalition I compiled from the list of nations in Yahoo minus the ones on the list from the Washington Post. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are all very notable in my opinion in opposing the war. The Saudi's are our "allies" and Turkey is in Nato yet both actively opposed the war. Iran is sending people into Iraq to help the insurgents as they believe we are establishing a puppet state. Kuwait is not on the list of nations with active soldiers although they are one of the direct beneficiaries from the battle or war or whatever.

[PlanoJ]

Your link is also from an article posted in February. A few key nations such as Spain have sense pulled out of the coalition due to changes in national leadership. While you may say that Spain pulled out because they are weak and scared, I believe others will follow including perhaps the UK after their next elections.

[dude1394]

I believe the post article also is only listing members of the coalition that have provided troops. Afghanistan for example obviously has none to provide but support the effort. I believe this list is the supporting countries in troops as well as support in other means.

Kuwait for example obviously supports the effort however has no troops.