Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Fahrenheit 911: Will you see it?

View Poll Results: Will you see it?
Poll Options:
Yes and I lean left. 28 votes (31.46%)
Yes and I lean right. 5 votes (5.62%)
No and I lean left. 3 votes (3.37%)
No and I lean right. 9 votes (10.11%)
Yes and my legs are straight thankyouverymuch. 33 votes (37.08%)
No and I prefer to sit. 11 votes (12.36%)
Voters: 89. You may not vote on this poll
Fahrenheit 911: Will you see it? (Page 5)
Thread Tools
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:31 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Gore: 50,996,116
Bush: 50,456,169

What's misleading?
Saying that in itself isn't. But trying to say that Gore somehow deserved to win because of it is indeed misleading. Obviously MORE of this country wanted Bush. The bigger cities with MORE people wanted Gore.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:32 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
If you have sex with a women while you are married, and she agrees to have sex with you, does that suddenly make it ok? Of course not.
Wow. Just....wow.

You know, maybe you should see the movie. Come back when you've seen it and are in a position to comment on it, m'kay?
     
gomanute
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Indianapolis Ice
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:33 PM
 
gomanute wants to get another post in this thread before it is locked.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:33 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Wow. Just....wow.

You know, maybe you should see the movie. Come back when you've seen it and are in a position to comment on it, m'kay?
Wow. Just....wow.

What I said had nothing to DO with seeing this movie.

I was showing you how just because the woman gave him the ok, suddenly doesn't justify it.

Right? Right.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:33 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Saying that in itself isn't. But trying to say that Gore somehow deserved to win because of it is indeed misleading. Obviously MORE of this country wanted Bush. The bigger cities with MORE people wanted Gore.
Never said he "deserved to win" because of it. I do know all about how the presidential elections work in this country, thanks. I simply said he got more votes...which he did.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:35 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Never said he "deserved to win" because of it. I do know all about how the presidential elections work in this country, thanks.

My original reply wasn't to you. You know the one with the image.

I simply said he got more votes...which he did.
Right, and I was simply saying Bush got more of the country, a lot more. Which he did.

Putting things into perspective.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:35 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Wow. Just....wow.

What I said had nothing to DO with seeing this movie.

I was showing you how just because the woman gave him the ok, suddenly doesn't justify it.

Right? Right.
So you're saying that even though she wanted to do this movie (probably because she wanted people to hear what she had to say), Moore shouldn't have used it? Even though that's obviously what she wanted?
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:36 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
My original reply wasn't to you. You know the one with the image.
Never said it was.

Right, and I was simply saying Bush got more of the country, a lot more. Which he did.

Putting things into perspective.
Misleading. But OK, whatever.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:38 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
So you're saying that even though she wanted to do this movie (probably because she wanted people to hear what she had to say), Moore shouldn't have used it? Even though that's obviously what she wanted?
Do you think she called him up asking him to? Of course not.

he was LOOKING for people like this to exploit . That is what is pathetic.

To use a man's death, esp one that fought and died for his country, as a political tool for propaganda. I wonder what he would say about what Moore did.
     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:38 PM
 
Again. US Government 101:

The popular vote does not elect the president. All your numbers show are what they usually show. There was no clear popular person for the office according to those who bothered to show up and vote.

You interested in popular vote statistics?

Here: http://www.presidentsusa.net/popularvote.html

JFK = Lowest of top 20
Richard Nixon = Number One
...
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:39 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:

Misleading. But OK, whatever.
Tell me, how is it misleading zach? People hear "Gore won more votes" and think "How did Bush win" ?

I have had people ask me that. I then have showed them that picture, and then they say "aaaah, makes a bit more sense now"

Putting things into perspective.

Of course that guy wasn't a political zealot.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:39 PM
 
Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Again. US Government 101:

The popular vote does not elect the president. All your numbers show are what they usually show. There was no clear popular person for the office according to those who bothered to show up and vote.

You interested in popular vote statistics?

Here: http://www.presidentsusa.net/popularvote.html

JFK = Lowest of top 20
Richard Nixon = Number One
I do know how presidents are elected.
     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:42 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
I do know how presidents are elected.
It doesn't seem like you know from reading the tripe you type.
...
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:42 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Do you think she called him up asking him to? Of course not.

he was LOOKING for people like this to exploit . That is what is pathetic.

To use a man's death, esp one that fought and died for his country, as a political tool for propaganda. I wonder what he would say about what Moore did.
I'd recommend you go see the movie. Just a suggestion.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:43 PM
 
Originally posted by ghost_flash:
It doesn't seem like you know from reading the tripe you type.
Really? Gore won more voted than Bush; is that not true? I NEVER said "And that's why he is the REAL president," now did I?
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:43 PM
 
ghost I don't think he was confused about how elections work. I think some people just think the "popular vote" means something.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:44 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
I'd recommend you go see the movie. Just a suggestion.
Again, I don't have to see the movie to make a judgment like that.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:45 PM
 
And remember folks, there is a reason why people who take up for, or follow and believe Moore's lies are called "Mooreons"
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:50 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I think some people just think the "popular vote" means something.
Shouldn't it?
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:52 PM
 
Popular Vote Top 20

The following is a list of the individuals who have received the most popular votes for President. The figures are in millions.


1. Richard Nixon 112.6

2. Franklin D. Roosevelt 103.4

3. Ronald Reagan 98.4

4. Bill Clinton 90.5

5. George Bush 87.0

6. Jimmy Carter 76.3

7. Dwight Eisenhower 69.4

8. Adlai Stevenson 53.1

9. Al Gore 51.0

10. George W. Bush 50.5

11. Thomas Dewey 44.0

12. Lyndon B. Johnson 42.8

13. Michael Dukakis 41.0

14. Gerald Ford 39.1

15. Bob Dole 37.8

16. Walter Mondale 37.6

17. Herbert Hoover 37.2

18. John F. Kennedy 34.2

19. Hubert Humphrey 30.9

20. George McGovern 28.9

Source: National Archives and Records Administration.

PRESIDENTS HOME PAGE

The purpose of this site is to provide researchers, teachers, students, politicians, journalists, and citizens a complete resource guide to the US Presidents.

If you would like to suggest a Presidential link, report a broken link, or have any comments or questions please email:

[email protected]

Copyright 2002, by CB Presidential Research Services
...
     
Xeo
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Austin, MN, USA
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:56 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
ghost I don't think he was confused about how elections work. I think some people just think the "popular vote" means something.
And some people think counties mean something when clearly they do not.

This is the map you should be showing people. And it even shows more land area, which is apparently what helps it "make sense" for the dummies that don't know how elections work. Confusing them with pictures of counties is not putting things into perspective any more than popular vote. Both are worthless statistics.

     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 08:59 PM
 
Originally posted by Xeo:
And some people think counties mean something when clearly they do not.

This is the map you should be showing people. And it even shows more land area, which is apparently what helps it "make sense" for the dummies that don't know how elections work. Confusing them with pictures of counties is not putting things into perspective any more than popular vote. Both are worthless statistics.

You are correct in that the electoral vote puts a man in the Whitehouse.
It would be nice to have the popular vote, because then the country will support your initiative whole-heartedly. Reagan was very successful, as was Nixon. Too bad about that Watergate thing. Look at Kennedy though! He was horrible at 18 out of the top 20. I guess he just worked harder to earn the people's oppinions.
...
     
Xeo
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Austin, MN, USA
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:00 PM
 
Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Popular Vote Top 20

The following is a list of the individuals who have received the most popular votes for President. The figures are in millions.
He didn't say "doesn't it?", he said "shouldn't it?". So stop quoting from a page you already linked to.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:12 PM
 
Originally posted by Xeo:
And some people think counties mean something when clearly they do not.

From this past election, it seems to have meant more than the popular vote. But you are right, neither really mean anything.

This is the map you should be showing people. And it even shows more land area, which is apparently what helps it "make sense" for the dummies that don't know how elections work. Confusing them with pictures of counties is not putting things into perspective any more than popular vote. Both are worthless statistics.
Bush took more counties than Gore. A lot more. But like you said, it means about as much as the popular vote.

My map was more detailed. Showing exactly who won in what county. I know the lefty's don't like that picture though. I hardly ever show it. Only when people use the tired old "Gore won the popular vote" silliness. As if it means anything.

Gore won the popular vote.

Bush won more counties than Gore.

Bush won the election.

That last one is all that matters.
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:23 PM
 
Election schmelection. You mean, the Supreme Court elected Bush for us, right? [/troll]

And I don't remember seeing anyone say the popular vote meant anything.

I'm waiting to see the film before I give my opinion of it.

So what did Moore actually lie about in this film? I'm honestly curious. The guy presents facts, and he gives his biased opinion on them—he's not always fair about it, but Moore's admitted as much. Doesn't the film really raise some serious questions that should be asked of the administration? I don't think it's unpatriotic to question your leader's motives. This is the man's agenda—all you snide, bickering tits have your own agendas. I don't think this makes it any less legitimate, either, no matter if you agree with his opinion of the situation or not. At least see the thing before we go after each others' throats.
     
Cadaver
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ~/
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:31 PM
 
I am not a fan of Michael Moore, but after seeing F 9/11, even with a large grain(s) of salt, I can say I like Bush less.

     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:35 PM
 
Here ya go Mindfad

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialR...20040601a.html

(CNSNews.com) - One of the central charges made by left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore in his upcoming, Bush-bashing film is being undermined by another critic of the president -- former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke.

Moore's upcoming film, Fahrenheit 911, points to President Bush's rumored relationship with Saudi officials as the motivating factor in the president allegedly allowing relatives of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to fly out of the country following the Sept.11, 2001 terror attacks.

But Clarke recently admitted that he alone approved the exit of the bin Laden kin -- damaging the key premise of Moore's film.

Chris Horner, a GOP strategist, finds irony in the fact that the credibility of Moore's film is being undermined by one of Bush's biggest critics even before the film is released in the United States


Here is another interesting story.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=39079


The company distributing filmmaker Michael Moore's Bush-bashing movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" says it won't reject an offer of help from Middle East terrorist organization Hezbollah.

\ many theater owners are showing caution about running overtly political film, which officially opens nationwide on Friday.

Last month, the Moore and his partners boasted the movie would be rolled out in more than 1,000 theaters nationwide.

Later, that number was revised to "about 1,000." The next estimate was 750. In recent days, the guess had dropped to below 500.

"Michael Moore has made it clear that this film is nothing more than an attempt to undermine support for the war on terrorism, and movie theater operators have made it clear they wish to have no part in Moore's anti-military propaganda," said Howard Kaloogian, chairman of Move America Forward. "This movie is about as popular as ice in Antarctica, and movie theaters are giving Michael Moore's 'bash America' flick a chilly reception."


http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/du...cs/8838660.htm

Rep. Mark Kennedy, a Republican, is a little annoyed at leftist film maker Michael Moore after an edited version of an interview between the two appeared in the trailer for Moore's upcoming U.S. release of the film "Fahrenheit 9/11."

"I was walking back to my office after casting a vote, and all of a sudden some oversized guy puts a mike in my face and a camera in my face," Kennedy said. "He starts asking if I can help him recruit more people from families of members of Congress to participate in the war on terror."

Kennedy said he told Moore that he has two nephews in the military, one who has just been deployed in the Army National Guard. But to Kennedy's annoyance, his response to Moore was cut from the trailer, which was released Thursday. His response was also cut from the film, according to a spokeswoman for the movie.

"The interesting thing is that they used my image, but not my words," Kennedy said. "It's representative of the fact that Michael Moore doesn't always give the whole story, and he's a master of the misleading."

A spokeswoman for the fiercely anti-Bush film, which has found a U.S. distributor after the Walt Disney Co. refused to release it, said she had no comment.

A transcript released by the film's producers shows Moore telling Kennedy that "there is only one member (of Congress) who has a kid over there in Iraq." He asks Kennedy to help him pass out literature encouraging others "to get their kids to enlist in the Army and go over to Iraq."

Kennedy replies, "I'd be happy to. Especially those who voted for the war. (As Kennedy did.) I have a nephew on his way to Afghanistan."

To which Moore replies: "I appreciate it."

Anne Mason, Kennedy's spokeswoman, said Friday that Kennedy now has one nephew in the military and another one who got out of the Navy since the Moore interview. In addition, Kennedy's cousin's son recently completed his military service.


Another good article.

http://politics.slate.msn.com/id/210...ontinueArticle
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:36 PM
 
Originally posted by Cadaver:
I am not a fan of Michael Moore, but after seeing F 9/11, even with a large grain(s) of salt, I can say I like Bush less.
So you are letting a movie that is based on baseless accusations effect your judgment of someone?
     
wolfen
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On this side of there
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:41 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
So you are letting a movie that is based on baseless accusations effect your judgment of someone?
Baseless? Hardly.

Zim, are you one of those "I don't have to see the movie to know it's all lies?" kinda people?
Do you want forgiveness or respect?
     
wolfen
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On this side of there
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:43 PM
 
Originally posted by Xeo:
All this map shows is that certain states perceive different needs for their state and country than people in other states. No big surprise.

Land area will become important when rocks earn the right to vote. Right after the nuKULar war.
Do you want forgiveness or respect?
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:49 PM
 
Originally posted by wolfen:
Baseless? Hardly.

You are right, IT WAS based on something.

Lies.


Zim, are you one of those "I don't have to see the movie to know it's all lies?" kinda people?
No, I will watch it. But you don't have to, to know it's full of lies. Esp with all the debunking that went on before it even came out here in the US. Even by people that dislike Bush.
     
wolfen
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On this side of there
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:51 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:

You are right, IT WAS based on something.

Lies.
Wait...are you talking about the war on Iraq, now? 'Cause that was a awesome segue.
Do you want forgiveness or respect?
     
zigzag
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 09:53 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
So you are letting a movie that is based on baseless accusations effect your judgment of someone?
The film, which you haven't even seen, is composed of actual film clips of Bush. People can draw conclusions about Bush (positive or negative) from those actual film clips, without regard to anything Moore says or does. Cadaver drew certain conclusions despite his dislike of Moore.

This is very much like the Bush ad that you defended despite the fact that it does essentially the same thing: uses actual film clips of Democrats, in some cases out of context, to reveal something about them, from which people can draw their own conclusions.
     
jbartone
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:10 PM
 
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:22 PM
 
Originally posted by wolfen:
Wait...are you talking about the war on Iraq, now? 'Cause that was a awesome segue.
Typical.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:24 PM
 
Originally posted by jbartone:
F 9/11 NO. 1 AT BOX OFFICE:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/c...4-06-25&p=.htm
So was Titanic for a few weeks.
     
Demonhood
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:28 PM
 
i've merged the two threads about this (one from the lounge, from from in here) for added confusion!

enjoy, you crazy bickering kids.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:47 PM
 
Originally posted by Demonhood:
i've merged the two threads about this (one from the lounge, from from in here) for added confusion!

enjoy, you crazy bickering kids.

*smacks you with his cane*
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:50 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Here ya go Mindfad

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialR...20040601a.html

(CNSNews.com) - One of the central charges made by left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore in his upcoming, Bush-bashing film is being undermined by another critic of the president -- former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke.

Moore's upcoming film, Fahrenheit 911, points to President Bush's rumored relationship with Saudi officials as the motivating factor in the president allegedly allowing relatives of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to fly out of the country following the Sept.11, 2001 terror attacks.

But Clarke recently admitted that he alone approved the exit of the bin Laden kin -- damaging the key premise of Moore's film.

Chris Horner, a GOP strategist, finds irony in the fact that the credibility of Moore's film is being undermined by one of Bush's biggest critics even before the film is released in the United States

Here ya go, Zimph:

WHAT THE FILM SAYS:

Sen. Byron Dorgan: We had some airplanes authorized at the highest levels of our government to fly to pick up Osama Bin Laden's family members and others from Saudi Arabia and transport them out of this country.

Narration: It turns out that the White House approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens and numerous other Saudis. At least six private jets and nearly two dozen commercial planes carried the Saudis and the Bin ladens out of the U.S. after September 13th. In all, 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to leave the country.

Additionally, in an interview with author Craig Unger, the film makes reference to the fact that these individuals were briefly interviewed before they were allowed to leave.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 10:52 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
Again, I don't have to see the movie to make a judgment like that.
I know you want so badly to believe that anyone with a dissenting opinion, in a movie with a dissenting view, is being "exploited." Not so, I'm afraid.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:24 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Here ya go, Zimph:
You do realize Clark said that he and he alone gave permission for those flights. And it didn't go above him.

He is not the "highest level of our government"

They were trying to pin it on Bush.

Bush had nothing to do with it.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:25 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
I know you want so badly to believe that anyone with a dissenting opinion, in a movie with a dissenting view, is being "exploited." Not so, I'm afraid.
No, a dead man that had died for his country was being exploited for purely political purposes.

And not even honest ones.

He was used to spread FUD.

Shame on Michael Moore. And shame on the Mooreons that defend his actions.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:26 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
You do realize Clark said that he and he alone gave permission for those flights. And it didn't go above him.

He is not the "highest level of our government"

They were trying to pin it on Bush.

Bush had nothing to do with it.
a.) You just SAID "it didn't go above him." LOL!!!1one!
b.) Moore didn't pin it on Bush. See, if you'd see the movie, you'd know that.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:28 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
a.) You just SAID "it didn't go above him." LOL!!!1one!

?

b.) Moore didn't pin it on Bush. See, if you'd see the movie, you'd know that.
One of the central charges made by left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore in his upcoming, Bush-bashing film is being undermined by another critic of the president -- former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke.

Moore's upcoming film, Fahrenheit 911, points to President Bush's rumored relationship with Saudi officials as the motivating factor in the president allegedly allowing relatives of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to fly out of the country following the Sept.11, 2001 terror attacks.

But Clarke recently admitted that he alone approved the exit of the bin Laden kin -- damaging the key premise of Moore's film.


I guess they didn't watch it either huh?

I guess Clarke hadn't seen it either.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:32 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
No, a dead man that had died for his country was being exploited for purely political purposes.

And not even honest ones.

He was used to spread FUD.

Shame on Michael Moore. And shame on the Mooreons that defend his actions.
Do you know what Sgt. Michael Pedersen said in his final letter? Here:

"He [Bush] got us out here for nothing whatsoever. I am so furious right now, Mama,"
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:33 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Do you know what Sgt. Michael Pedersen said in his final letter? Here:

"He [Bush] got us out here for nothing whatsoever. I am so furious right now, Mama,"
I am sure he did.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:33 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
?
In response to your claim, 'He is not the "highest level of our government'."

One of the central charges made by left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore in his upcoming, Bush-bashing film is being undermined by another critic of the president -- former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke.

Moore's upcoming film, Fahrenheit 911, points to President Bush's rumored relationship with Saudi officials as the motivating factor in the president allegedly allowing relatives of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to fly out of the country following the Sept.11, 2001 terror attacks.

But Clarke recently admitted that he alone approved the exit of the bin Laden kin -- damaging the key premise of Moore's film.


I guess they didn't watch it either huh?

I guess Clarke hadn't seen it either.
Why don't you see it, so you can find out for yourself?
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:34 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I am sure he did.
Yup. And lots more.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:37 PM
 
Originally posted by zachs:
Why don't you see it, so you can find out for yourself?
I believe I said I was going to watch it many times in this thread

I'll make sure not to drink any liquids during the viewing. I wouldn't want it coming out of my nose from laughter.

A friend of mine works in the Movie theater. His boss is a real liberal nut. He is going to let me and a few others watch it around 12am Monday.

For free.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Jun 26, 2004, 11:41 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I believe I said I was going to watch it many times in this thread

I'll make sure not to drink any liquids during the viewing. I wouldn't want it coming out of my nose from laughter.

A friend of mine works in the Movie theater. His boss is a real liberal nut. He is going to let me and a few others watch it around 12am Monday.

For free.
Yeah, I was hysterical at parts, too.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:52 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,