PDA

View Full Version : Moore's Movie



june
06-23-2004, 08:28 PM
Michael Moore's movie will open Friday June 25 th in Abilene...

fishhook
06-23-2004, 08:29 PM
Thanks for the warning! :lol:

BigGunz
06-23-2004, 08:32 PM
hahahahaha...good one!...Im not donating any money to line that idiots pockets!....I just read an interview with Michael Moore and did you know he has a crush on Hillary Clinton!....lol

fishhook
06-23-2004, 08:40 PM
Me either! hehe

They might make a good couple. hehehe

Rhiannon
06-23-2004, 08:41 PM
hahahahaha...good one!...Im not donating any money to line that idiots pockets!....I just read an interview with Michael Moore and did you know he has a crush on Hillary Clinton!....lol

Go figure!

BigGunz
06-23-2004, 08:42 PM
Me either! hehe

They might make a good couple. hehehe


roflol...yeah chicken legs and dumplings!

CuriousGal
06-23-2004, 10:04 PM
Michael Moore's movie will open Friday June 25 th in Abilene...

So?????? Do you really think that I'm going to spend my hard-earned money on Michael Moore's garbage?

CG

Miss Mally
06-23-2004, 10:09 PM
I believe I will pass.

Rhiannon
06-24-2004, 08:13 AM
.....When Saddam came out of his hole ,..he saw his shadow,and it meant 4 more years of George Bush!!!! yeeHaw!!!

june
06-24-2004, 08:22 AM
What are you people afraid of? Mel Gibson used the church to make jillions...Moore just won an award with his movie...Ignorances is bliss...

Rhiannon
06-24-2004, 08:46 AM
I fear nothing on this planet. Least of all a waste of human skin like Michael Moore.

jenfrog81
06-24-2004, 09:05 AM
.....When Saddam came out of his hole ,..he saw his shadow,and it meant 4 more years of George Bush!!!! yeeHaw!!!**That's Funny ****lololol

Miss Mally
06-24-2004, 09:51 AM
What are you people afraid of? Mel Gibson used the church to make jillions...Moore just won an award with his movie...Ignorances is bliss...

I am not afraid of anything...I just have no desire to put my money in Moores pocket.

Mel didn't USE the Church. No one was forced or taken in cuffs to see the film. We had the freedom to go see one...and the freedom to chose not to see the other.

BigGunz
06-24-2004, 03:15 PM
Mel Gibson is a devout Christian...Michael Moore is a devout IDIOT!

Goalie
06-24-2004, 06:17 PM
Yeah, Moore won an award alright... it was at the Cannes Film Festival... in FRANCE! Again, go figure! LOL

Phoneguy
06-24-2004, 06:48 PM
The reviews are fascinating:

"Postwar filmmakers gave us the documentary, Rob Reiner gave us the mockumentary, and Moore initiated a third genre, the crockumentary" - from http://thbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6494

CuriousGal
06-24-2004, 09:36 PM
What are you people afraid of? Mel Gibson used the church to make jillions...Moore just won an award with his movie...Ignorances is bliss...

I'm afraid of nothing June. Gibson put out a very honorable movie, one that portrays accurately an event that is at the core of Christianity. He didn't set out to make jillions, as you say, but that's what has happened. Don't you remember that NO company wanted to release that movie? He had to do it on his own. God bless him for persevering and finding a way to distribute it.

As to Moore's win at Cannes. I'm supposed to think highly of a movie that won an award in France? France is nothing more than a waste to me and I'm so sorry that it means something to you. You are so disillusioned about this award.

Ignorance is bliss? That applies to you, not me. I do feel so sorry for you.

CG

pamela
06-25-2004, 10:22 AM
yes June shows all of us how ignorance is bliss...she worships the ground any liberal star walks on, especially bill and hill...so sad..
isn't it odd, there are so many of us who have finally payed enough attention woke up and seen the light, the right makes more sense!

kay
06-25-2004, 10:25 AM
Isn't this the guy that did Bowling for Columbine? I don't do politics and I don't argue religion but I will probabally watch this when it comes out on video. I watched clips on Good Morning America this morning and I kind of resent our current president referring to his party as "the elite" or "his base". Well because I am not wealthy, I guess that leaves me out since I can't afford to fund his campagne. And I don't like what he is doing in Iraq and neither does his dad!

Miss Mally
06-25-2004, 10:31 AM
Kay...you can't tell whether Bush said what Moore protrays him to have said in that movie at all. Moore cuts stuff up...takes it out of context...it is lies. He did this on the Bowling thing...as well as most of his other movies.

Moore is a liar, a hypocrite and a oportunist. I really don't think he believes in the left side either...he only believes in making money...no matter the cost...no matter who it destroys....and no matter if it makes the US look bad. This man has no loyalty.

june
06-25-2004, 11:13 AM
[


Moore is a liar, a hypocrite and a oportunist. I really don't think he believes in the left side either...he only believes in making money...no matter the cost...no matter who it destroys....and no matter if it makes the US look bad. This man has no loyalty.[/quote]

JUST LIKE MEL GIBSON...Opportunist--released PASSION just in time for the traditional Easter...

Miss Mally
06-25-2004, 11:37 AM
Mel didn't tell lies in his. He didn't take someones words and chop them up take them out of context and make it appear they said something they didn't.

Gibson's movie didn't destroy people...it built them up.

Gearldean
06-25-2004, 12:15 PM
The reviews are fascinating:

"Postwar filmmakers gave us the documentary, Rob Reiner gave us the mockumentary, and Moore initiated a third genre, the crockumentary" - from http://thbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6494
Well, they certainly hit the nail on the head! It was also character assassination.

fishhook
06-25-2004, 08:59 PM
Kay...you can't tell whether Bush said what Moore protrays him to have said in that movie at all. Moore cuts stuff up...takes it out of context...it is lies. He did this on the Bowling thing...as well as most of his other movies.

Moore is a liar, a hypocrite and a oportunist. I really don't think he believes in the left side either...he only believes in making money...no matter the cost...no matter who it destroys....and no matter if it makes the US look bad. This man has no loyalty.

I seen him on the news this evening and I thought the exact same thing.

pamela
06-26-2004, 08:37 AM
[

JUST LIKE MEL GIBSON...Opportunist--released PASSION just in time for the traditional Easter...

June, he (michaelmoore)LIES in this movie (just like he did in bowling)one example is the treatment of Jessica Lynch, he says she was treated GOOD ! that's ludicrious...he makes movies that divide America, Mel Gibson made a movie that was his passion, many became closer to Christ while filming this movie, you call yourself a Christian, but you sure don't act like one....
and for those of you who are un-educatedabout politics, just because someone is a Republican doesn't mean they are rich, that is a FALSEHOOD that the liberals want you to believe...the Republican platform basically is that you or ANYBODY has within them selves the ability to become great...the Democrats want you to remain dependent on teh government!

jenfrog81
06-26-2004, 09:52 AM
Okay maybe I took this the Wrong way * but * this ******you call yourself a Christian, but you sure don't act like one.... Pamela ...That was WRONG PURE WRONG to say to anyone .

pamela
06-26-2004, 11:02 AM
jen, you have not been here very long, June regularly BASHES Christians, especially when referring to Republicans, she is used to me sending barbs her way as she does my way too.....
IT'S JUST MY OPNION AND I HAVE THAT RIGHT!


and think about this why is it O K for michaelmoore to bash the Repulicans on a regular basis? He's making money and he calls himself a democrat, now do you think any of the $$$$ he makes will go to help anyone but himself? NO

also I shouldn't even bother to reply as June loves to start a thread and then delete it.

Miss Mally
06-26-2004, 11:04 AM
Okay maybe I took this the Wrong way * but * this ******you call yourself a Christian, but you sure don't act like one.... Pamela ...That was WRONG PURE WRONG to say to anyone .


sometimes Jen...the truth hurts. I think the point Pam was trying to make is...that June comes across as putting her political beliefs ahead of her Christian ones.

jenfrog81
06-26-2004, 11:30 AM
Love your emenys

Girlie
06-26-2004, 11:40 AM
On the news yesterday while talking about the opening of this film my Michael Moore, they showed clips of him in it chasing senators around asking them if they'll sign their own children up to go to Iraq ..... and of course, not one person they interviewed about being there was a Bush supporter ..... you could see the hate in their faces at the mention of his name.

jenfrog81
06-26-2004, 11:51 AM
On the news yesterday while talking about the opening of this film my Michael Moore, they showed clips of him in it chasing senators around asking them if they'll sign their own children up to go to Iraq ..... and of course, not one person they interviewed about being there was a Bush supporter ..... you could see the hate in their faces at the mention of his name. Yea I saw that * watch a LOT OF TV here ** but I did not like what they where asking .. I don't know alot about Bush my history is bad . I know that there is alot of good and bad things about a person * cause really no one out there is Perfect * But I think may just maybe Michael Moore is putting out the bad in bush Not letting anyone seening the GOOD * I think Michael Moore made this movie for People like me that don't know if they are DEC or REP to see and be even more Confuss about Polictes .....Okay I hope to hell this made sence and sorry about the grammer and spelling I hope ya'll try to see what I'm saying hard to pu tin words sometime s

Miss Mally
06-26-2004, 01:14 PM
jen....I think you are right. But not just about him wanting to influence you against Bush...but against America.

DrDon
06-26-2004, 02:16 PM
Also please keep in mind that only a couple of days after the 9-11 attacks -- before we could even really begin to start cleaning up the mess and finding the bodies -- Michael Moore was posting hateful screeds at his site about how the attack was all our (the US's) fault.

Rhiannon
06-26-2004, 08:10 PM
Hey, here's a surprise:
Film critics liked a Michael Moore film.
Whooooooooa?
Stop the press! This is NEWS!
Okay, really... you know what would be news here? If the critics DIDN'T like Mike's film.
I took a wild guess before I looked at Eberts review, and I figured he would give it 3 1/2 or 4 stars. Now I have't seen the film. How did I figure out that Ebert would give it 3 1/2?
Am I some kind of genius?
(Well, I am. But that's besides the point.)
As others have pointed out, there are two things that are going to determine whether this film is a success: the first weeks initial total, and the second weeks total.
Oh... and whether undecideded voters go in and think Mike's telling the unadultrated truth.
One other thing could kill his film. His ego. Its the damned most unattractive thing I've ever seen.

BigGunz
06-26-2004, 08:22 PM
The mans an idiot.....I would love to spend just five minutes with im in a locked room so he couldnt get out...then I would just like totally kick his..........well you know.....lol

Girlie
06-26-2004, 08:54 PM
knee?

roflol

BigGunz
06-26-2004, 09:06 PM
well there also.....roflol

june
06-30-2004, 10:17 AM
jen, you have not been here very long, June regularly BASHES Christians, especially when referring to Republicans, she is used to me sending barbs her way as she does my way too.....
IT'S JUST MY OPNION AND I HAVE THAT RIGHT!


and think about this why is it O K for michaelmoore to bash the Repulicans on a regular basis? He's making money and he calls himself a democrat, now do you think any of the $$$$ he makes will go to help anyone but himself? NO

also I shouldn't even bother to reply as June loves to start a thread and then delete it.

Thanks for the thought Jen but have no fear "IT IS WELL WITH MY SOUL". Have seen the movie. I think that it is wonderful that we live in a Democracy that will not censor. One question I have...it is a fact...why did the president continue reading a children's book after he had been warned of American being under attack? I challenge you all to see the movie...
Do Republicans not make money bashing Democrats?
My earnest prayer is that Church and State will always be separated whereas I and YOU will not be forced to be as The Church of England...

jenfrog81
06-30-2004, 10:25 AM
HECK I'M JUST GLAD THAT WE LIVE IN THE USA , FREEDOM OF SPEECH , THAT WE CAN MAKE ARE OWN CHOICES , BELIVE IN ARE OWN GOD , CAN EITHER HATE ARE NEIGHBOR OR LOVE ARE NEIGHBOR ...HEHEHEHHEHEHEHEHEEH I KNOW THAT WE STILL HAVE EVIL BUT ITS RIGHT NOW THIS EARTH CAN NOT BE PREFECT .

fishhook
06-30-2004, 05:00 PM
One question I have...it is a fact...why did the president continue reading a children's book after he had been warned of American being under attack?

If my memory serves me correctly. The President was not told we were under "attack" in the news footage that was shown. He was only told that a plane had hit the Twin Towers. At the time, it was just thought to be a horrible accident.

BigGunz
06-30-2004, 06:22 PM
I believe you are correct Fish...thats what I remember hearing also and after the second one hit they moved out! just another way the Dems try to spin the truth I think!..anything to make Bush look bad even if its not exactly the whole story...what a way to get folks to change parties or vote their way!

Miss Mally
06-30-2004, 08:28 PM
Yeah...there is a big difference in thinking there has been a terrible accident...and thinking the country is under attack.

fishhook
06-30-2004, 08:37 PM
All right! he...he...he...mark one up for the "right" side! :lol:

BigGunz
06-30-2004, 08:39 PM
roflol....I dont know if its always the right side...but its the side Im voting for this time thats for sure!

CuriousGal
06-30-2004, 08:39 PM
Just an FYI....this is LONG but well worth the read. Quite frankly, I haven't read all of this thread but I figure that this fits and wanted to post it.

CG

Some of the main points in ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ really aren’t very fair at all

By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball

Newsweek

Updated: 6:26 p.m. ET June 30, 2004

June 30 - In his new movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” film-maker Michael Moore makes the eye-popping claim that Saudi Arabian interests “have given” $1.4 billion to firms connected to the family and friends of President George W. Bush. This, Moore suggests, helps explain one of the principal themes of the film: that the Bush White House has shown remarkable solicitude to the Saudi royals, even to the point of compromising the war on terror. When you and your associates get money like that, Moore says at one point in the movie, “who you gonna like? Who’s your Daddy?”

But a cursory examination of the claim reveals some flaws in Moore’s arithmetic—not to mention his logic. Moore derives the $1.4 billion figure from journalist Craig Unger’s book, “House of Bush, House of Saud.” Nearly 90 percent of that amount, $1.18 billion, comes from just one source: contracts in the early to mid-1990’s that the Saudi Arabian government awarded to a U.S. defense contractor, BDM, for training the country’s military and National Guard. What’s the significance of BDM? The firm at the time was owned by the Carlyle Group, the powerhouse private-equity firm whose Asian-affiliate advisory board has included the president’s father, George H.W. Bush.

Leave aside the tenuous six-degrees-of-separation nature of this “connection.” The main problem with this figure, according to Carlyle spokesman Chris Ullman, is that former president Bush didn’t join the Carlyle advisory board until April, 1998—five months after Carlyle had already sold BDM to another defense firm. True enough, the former president was paid for one speech to Carlyle and then made an overseas trip on the firm’s behalf the previous fall, right around the time BDM was sold. But Ullman insists any link between the former president’s relations with Carlyle and the Saudi contracts to BDM that were awarded years earlier is entirely bogus. “The figure is inaccurate and misleading,” said Ullman. “The movie clearly implies that the Saudis gave $1.4 billion to the Bushes and their friends. But most of it went to a Carlyle Group company before Bush even joined the firm. Bush had nothing to do with BDM.”

In light of the extraordinary box office success of “Fahrenheit 9/11,” and its potential political impact, a rigorous analysis of the film’s assertions seems more than warranted. Indeed, Moore himself has invited the scrutiny. He has set up a Web site and “war-room” to defend the claims in the movie-and attack his critics. (The war-room’s overseers are two veteran spin-doctors from the Clinton White House: Chris Lehane and Mark Fabiani.) Moore also this week contended that the media was pounding away at him “pretty hard” because “they’re embarrassed. They’ve been outed as people who did not do their job.”

In response to inquiries from NEWSWEEK about the Carlyle issue, Lehane shot back this week with a volley of points: There were multiple Bush “connections” to the Carlyle Group throughout the period of the Saudi contracts to BDM, Lehane noted in an e-mail, including the fact that the firm’s principals included James Baker (Secretary of State during the first Bush administration) and Richard Darman (the first Bush’s OMB chief). Moreover, George W. Bush himself had his own Carlyle Group link: between 1990 and 1994, he served on the board of another Carlyle-owned firm, Carterair, a now defunct airline catering firm.

But unmentioned in “Fahrenheit/911,” or in the Lehane responses, is a considerable body of evidence that cuts the other way. The idea that the Carlyle Group is a wholly owned subsidiary of some loosely defined “Bush Inc.” concern seems hard to defend. Like many similar entities, Carlyle boasts a roster of bipartisan Washington power figures. Its founding and still managing partner is Howard Rubenstein, a former top domestic policy advisor to Jimmy Carter. Among the firm’s senior advisors is Thomas “Mack” McLarty, Bill Clinton’s former White House chief of staff, and Arthur Levitt, Clinton’s former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. One of its other managing partners is William Cannard, Clinton’s chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Spokesman Ullman was the Clinton-era spokesman for the SEC.

As for the president’s own Carlyle link, his service on the Carterair board ended when he quit to run for Texas governor—a few months before the first of the Saudi contracts to the unrelated BDM firm was awarded. Moreover, says Ullman, Bush “didn’t invest in the [Carterair] deal and he didn’t profit from it.” (The firm was a big money loser and was even cited by the campaign of Ann Richards, Bush’s 1994 gubernatorial opponent, as evidence of what a lousy businessman he was.)

Most importantly, the movie fails to show any evidence that Bush White House actually has intervened in any way to promote the interests of the Carlyle Group. In fact, the one major Bush administration decision that most directly affected the company’s interest was the cancellation of a $11 billion program for the Crusader rocket artillery system that had been developed for the U.S. Army ( during the Clinton administration)-a move that had been foreshadowed by Bush’s own statements during the 2000 campaign saying he wanted a lighter and more mobile military. The Crusader was manufactured by United Defense, which had been wholly owned by Carlyle until it spun the company off in a public offering in Ocotber, 2001 (and profited to the tune of $237 million). Carlyle still owned 47 percent of the shares in the defense company at the time that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld—in the face of stiff congressional resistance-cancelled the Crusader program the following year. These developments, like much else relevant to Carlyle, goes unmentioned in Moore’s movie.

None of this is to suggest that there aren’t legitimate questions that deserve to be asked about the influence that secretive firms like Carlyle have in Washington-not to mention the Saudis themselves (an issue that has been taken up repeatedly in our weekly Terror Watch columns.) Nor are we trying to say that “Fahrenheit 9/11” isn’t a powerful and effective movie that raises a host of legitimate issues about President Bush’s response to the September 11 attacks, the climate of fear engendered by the war on terror and, most importantly, about the wisdom and horrific human toll of the war in Iraq.

But for all the reasonable points he makes, on more than a few occasions in the movie Moore twists and bends the available facts and makes glaring omissions in ways that end up clouding the serious political debate he wants to provoke.

Consider Moore’s handling of another conspiratorial claim: the idea that oil-company interest in building a pipeline through Afghanistan influenced early Bush administration policy regarding the Taliban. Moore raises the issue by stringing together two unrelated events. The first is that a delegation of Taliban leaders flew to Houston, Texas, in 1997 (”while George W. Bush was governor of Texas,” the movie helpfully points out) to meet with executives of Unocal, an oil company that was indeed interested in building a pipeline to carry natural gas from the Caspian Sea through Afghanistan.

The second is that another Taliban emissary visited Washington in March, 2001 and got an audience at the State Department, leaving Moore to speculate that the Bush administration had gone soft on the protectors of Osama bin Laden because it was interested in promoting a pipeline deal. "Why on earth would the Bush administration allow a Taliban leader to visit the United States knowing that the Taliban were harboring the man who bombed the USS Cole and our African embassies?" Moore asks at one point.

This, as conspiracy theories go, is more than a stretch. Unocal’s interest in building the Afghan pipeline is well documented. Indeed, according to “Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to Sept. 10., 2001,” the critically acclaimed book by Washington Post managing editor Steve Coll, Unocal executives met repeatedly with Clinton administration officials throughout the late 1999s in an effort to promote the project—in part by getting the U.S. government to take a more conciliatory approach to the Taliban. “It was an easy time for an American oil executive to find an audience in the Clinton White House,” Coll writes on page 307 of his book. “At the White House, [Unocal lobbyist Marty Miller] met regularly with Sheila Heslin, the director of energy issues at the National Security Council, whose suite next to the West Wing coursed with visitors from American oil firms. Miller found Heslin…very supportive of Unocal’s agenda in Afghanistan.”

Coll never suggests that the Clintonites’ interest in the Unocal project was because of the corrupting influence of big oil. Clinton National Security Council advisor “Berger, Heslin and their White House colleagues saw themselves engaged in a hardheaded synthesis of American commercial interests and national security goals,” he writes. “They wanted to use the profit-making motives of American oil companies to thwart one of the country’s most determined enemies, Iran, and to contain the longer-term ambitions of a restless Russia.”

Whatever the motive, the Unocal pipeline project was entirely a Clinton-era proposal: By 1998, as the Taliban hardened its positions, the U.S. oil company pulled out of the deal. By the time George W. Bush took office, it was a dead issue—and no longer the subject of any lobbying in Washington. (Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force report in May, 2001, makes no reference to it.) There is no evidence that the Taliban envoy who visited Washington in March, 2001-and met with State Department and National Security Council officials—ever brought up the pipeline. Nor is there any evidence anybody in the Bush administration raised it with him. The envoy brought a letter to Bush offering negotiations to resolve the issue of what should be done with bin Laden. (A few weeks earlier, Taliban leader Mullah Omar had floated the idea of convening a tribunal of Islamic religious scholars to review the evidence against the Al Qaeda leader.) The Taliban offer was promptly shot down. “We have not seen from the Taliban a proposal that would meet the requirements of the U.N. resolution to hand over Osama bin Laden to a country where he can be brought to justice,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said at the time.

The use of innuendo is rife through other critical passages of “Fahrenheit 9/11.” The movie makes much of the president’s relationship with James R. Bath, a former member of his Texas Air National Guard who, like Bush, was suspended from flying at one point for failure to take a physical. The movie suggests that the White House blacked out a reference to Bath’s missed physical from his National Guard records not because of legal concerns over the Privacy Act but because it was trying to conceal the Bath connection-a presumed embarrassment because the Houston businessman had once been the U.S. money manager for the bin Laden family. After being hired by the bin Ladens to manager their money in Texas, Bath “in turn,” the movie says, “invested in George W. Bush.”

The investment in question is real: In the late 1970’s, Bath put up $50,000 into Bush’s Arbusto Energy, (one of a string of failed oil ventures by the president), giving Bath a 5 percent interest in the company. The implication seems to be that, years later, because of this link, Bush was somehow not as zealous about his determination to bin Laden.

Leaving aside the fact that the bin Laden family, which runs one of Saudi Arabia’s biggest construction firms, has never been linked to terrorism, the movie-which relied heavily on Unger’s book-fails to note the author’s conclusion about what to make of the supposed Bin Laden-Bath-Bush nexus: that it may not mean anything. The “Bush-Bin Laden ‘relationships’ were indirect—two degrees of separation, perhaps—and at times have been overstated,” Unger writes in his book. While critics have charged that bin Laden money found its way into Arbusto through Bath, Unger notes that “no hard evidence has ever been found to back up that charge” and Bath himself has adamantly denied it. “One hundred percent of those funds (in Arbusto) were mine,” says Bath in a footnote on page 101 of Unger’s book. “It was a purely personal investment.”

The innuendo is greatest, of course, in Moore’s dealings with the matter of the departing Saudis flown out of the United States in the days after the September 11 terror attacks. Much has already been written about these flights, especially the film’s implication that figures with possible knowledge of the terrorist attacks were allowed to leave the country without adequate FBI screening—a notion that has been essentially rejected by the 9/11 commission. The 9/11 commission found that the FBI screened the Saudi passengers, ran their names through federal databases, interviewed 30 of them and asked many of them “detailed questions." “Nobody of interest to the FBI with regard to the 9/11 investigation was allowed to leave the country,” the commission stated. New information about a flight from Tampa, Florida late on Sept. 13 seems mostly a red herring: The flight didn’t take any Saudis out of the United States. It was a domestic flight to Lexington, Kentucky that took place after the Tampa airport had already reopened.

It is true that there are still some in the FBI who had questions about the flights-and wish more care had been taken to examine the passengers. But the film’s basic point—that the flights represented perhaps the supreme example of the Saudi government’s influence in the Bush White House-is almost impossible to defend. Why? Because while the film claims—correctly—that the “White House” approved the flights, it fails to note who exactly in the White House did so. It wasn’t the president, or the vice president or anybody else supposedly corrupted by Saudi oil money. It was Richard Clarke, the counter-terrorism czar who was a holdover from the Clinton administration and who has since turned into a fierce Bush critic. Clarke has publicly testified that he gave the greenlight—conditioned on FBI clearance.

“I thought the flights were correct,” Clarke told ABC News last week. “The Saudis had reasonable fear that they might be the subject of vigilante attacks in the United States after 9/11. And there is no evidence even to this date that any of the people who left on those flights were people of interest ot the FBI.” Like much else relevant to the issues Moore raises, Clarke’s reasons for approving the flights—and his thoughts on them today—won’t be found in “Fahrenheit 9/11,” nor in any of the ample material now being churned out by the film-maker’s “war room” to defend his provocative, if flawed, movie.


© 2004 Newsweek, Inc.

CuriousGal
06-30-2004, 08:53 PM
Isn't this the guy that did Bowling for Columbine? I don't do politics and I don't argue religion but I will probabally watch this when it comes out on video. I watched clips on Good Morning America this morning and I kind of resent our current president referring to his party as "the elite" or "his base". Well because I am not wealthy, I guess that leaves me out since I can't afford to fund his campagne. And I don't like what he is doing in Iraq and neither does his dad!

Well, I don't have a problem with Bush referring to the Republican party as "his base" because, c'mon, he's a Republican. He believes in Republican principles and works for those Republican principles. A Democrat president would do the same.

I haven't heard anything about him referring to the Republican party as being "the elite" so I can't comment but I would guess that he said that in the same way that a person would say that their football team was the best. Maybe he shouldn't have used the word "elite" because the connotation leads to the rich but I don't think he meant it that way.

I've watched G W Bush and I just don't see anything other than honesty, love of country, fighting terrorism at every front and fairness. That's what he's all about. November's vote should be a no-brainer for all. Of course, Howard Stern has told his degenerate audience to vote for Kerry. Now isn't THAT special?

CG

june
07-01-2004, 09:13 AM
Have any of you nay sayers been to see it? Or just taken the other fellow's word for it? Did you see NOrvell's interview on June 30 of a mother who had lost her son?

Miss Mally
07-01-2004, 10:00 AM
Have any of you nay sayers been to see it? Or just taken the other fellow's word for it? Did you see NOrvell's interview on June 30 of a mother who had lost her son?

I don't have to go to a topless bar...to know I don't want to go and that YES it is a topless bar. Same thing...same class etc.

Rhiannon
07-01-2004, 03:14 PM
If you conservatives out there REALLY believe in the power of market forces, and people making up their own minds, and if you guys are really on the side of Light and Goodness, then why resort to such despicable dirty tricks as this to squish opposing speech?

What's next? Every time a news station runs a story critical of a Republican, are you going to have their license yanked by the FCC?

Despicable. Low. Disgusting! (spits on Citizens United and anyone associated with them). Stop Effing with the First Amendment!

MiraculousMutha
07-01-2004, 04:00 PM
November's vote should be a no-brainer for all.
Hitler could take the White House if he were able to run this year.

BigGunz
07-01-2004, 06:02 PM
If Kerry wins you will be right about that!.....lol

AnonyMouseII
07-09-2004, 09:03 PM
November's vote should be a no-brainer for all.
Hitler could take the White House if he were able to run this year.

So, what you are saying is that the democrats would vote for Hitler. That sounds about right!

BigGunz
07-09-2004, 09:33 PM
I had recently read an interview with Moore in which he claimed that the Bush family secretly had government aircraft pick up Bin laden family members on the day ofthe attacks here (9/11) so that they would be safe from backlash...he apparently included that part of his claims in his Movie Farenheit 911 and tonight on Nightline that claim was found to be rubbish just like everything that comes out of Moore! I have the copy of the interview and would sure like to post parts of it here from my magazine for you all to see but I cannot use the words this idiot uses in the same sentence when he is talking about God....its so nasty and degrading language....I can tell you from the very depths of my soul I despise this Moore fellow more than anything in this world!

june
07-30-2004, 05:09 PM
Public can purchase copies of the Bipartisan Commssion Report on 9-11. Page after page documents Moore's charges as stated in the movie....Moore said that 124 Saudis left the country on 9-13 but it was 24 members of Bin Lauden Family for a total of 142 ... pages 35, 38 & 39 tells about our noble leader sitting for seven minutes before doing anyting...read the report...

spy
07-30-2004, 05:45 PM
I'm gonna go see it.

AnonyMouseII
07-30-2004, 09:57 PM
Seven whole minutes? It takes me that long to find my keys!

pamela
07-30-2004, 10:16 PM
all right, so lets say for aurgument's sake, Bush had those terrorists "busted" thanks to you liberals they would have hired "high profile" lawyers, claimed their rights were violated, we were racially profiled then, and THEN they would have "walked"..to come back another day 9/11 2001..WHO knows? they hate us all dems or Republicans ..I say we're on the right track why chnge in the middle of the stream?

june
07-31-2004, 09:54 AM
The current administration has gotten over 900 of our military killed by a so called enemy that had nothing to do with 9-11...After reading the Commissions report...I say the Republicans were so busy using the government to uncover a sexual tryst of Clinton that all eyes were divereted...It's time for a change...Remember
NO ONE DIED WHEN CLINTON LIED.

PROUD TO BE A FLAMING LIBERAL

free2bme
07-31-2004, 10:44 AM
The current administration has gotten over 900 of our military killed by a so called enemy that had nothing to do with 9-11...After reading the Commissions report...I say the Republicans were so busy using the government to uncover a sexual tryst of Clinton that all eyes were divereted...It's time for a change...Remember
NO ONE DIED WHEN CLINTON LIED.

PROUD TO BE A FLAMING LIBERAL
AMEN!!!!
You would think after 36 PDB's(president daily briefs), telling Bush that al-quida was going to attack & 8 of them told of hijacked planes going into bulidings, our great leader would have realized with the first plane, that we were under attack. Not to exclude the fact that the aide told him "we are under attack." 7 minutes was too long & then it took 20 minutes for him to get out of the school. I think Bush wanted the terriorist to give him date & time when they were going to attack but I think he'd still have went on vacation.
I think Bush was too busy looking at ways he could go after Hussein & get Iraq, Bin Ladin wasn't important to them.
Commission report is good reading & now it's on Amazon for $8.00-a good price for over 500 pages. Let's not forget there is more report after election..

MiraculousMutha
07-31-2004, 11:21 AM
I think Bush was too busy looking at ways he could go after Hussein & get Iraq, Bin Ladin wasn't important to them.
Absolutely. I knew his faith based initiative to give government money to his church would soon take back seat to finishing up where his father failed so miserably.

free2bme
08-01-2004, 09:33 PM
all right, so lets say for aurgument's sake, Bush had those terrorists "busted" thanks to you liberals they would have hired "high profile" lawyers, claimed their rights were violated, we were racially profiled then, and THEN they would have "walked"..to come back another day 9/11 2001..WHO knows? they hate us all dems or Republicans ..I say we're on the right track why chnge in the middle of the stream?


And we'd do it under 7 minutes :lol:

BigGunz
08-01-2004, 09:53 PM
and thats the saddest thing of all!

Miss Mally
08-02-2004, 10:35 PM
9-11 is not the only terrorist attack that has occurred over the last 15-20 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it may have been the one that woke us up...but Al que da is not the only terrorist group out there...and yes we have kept them hiding in caves the last 2 and a half years....Does that mean we ignore the rest of the terrorist around the world??????????

Miss Mally
09-05-2004, 03:33 PM
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/MichaelMoore/images/bok.gif

this was to cute not to revive this thread.