farenheit 9/11 discussion thread!!!!!!!!!

[fliptoniaaa]

post ur opinions here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bigpoppanils]

i can see how this thread will play out now:

left-winger: this movie was one of the best movies evar!!!!! it exposes bush for the fraud that he really is!

right-winger: moore is an american hating idiot that has no credibility at all.

left-winger: nazi.

right winger: get out of the country if you hate america so much.

then random cursing, usually copied and pasted from previous arguments.

[igloo]

i can see how this thread will play out now:

left-winger: this movie was one of the best movies evar!!!!! it exposes bush for the fraud that he really is!

right-winger: moore is an american hating idiot that has no credibility at all.

left-winger: nazi.

right winger: get out of the country if you hate america so much.

then random cursing, usually copied and pasted from previous arguments.

good one, and on point !

[fliptoniaaa]

good one, and on point !

the best part...is that all of us like sheep play the parts so well...instead of trying to make strides to make a better way for real!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ghhhhhost]

i just saw it and all i can say is this movie was one of the best movies evar!!!!! it exposes bush for the fraud that he really is!

[thrillfire]

I dragged my semi-republican bf to see it.. I don't know what he thought, but i thought it was good but it was everything I already knew... The middle part with the impact of the war from both sides I though was the most emotional and best.

[siceone]

If you want to know about the untruths in michael moores movies check out his interview with matt lauer. It was really suprising but Matt Lauer all but ripped him one also check out the 9/11 commisions iterim report, it clearly states that president bush gave no clearance for the bin laden family to leave and it was richard clarke alone who gave the go ahead, he has stated this repeatedly.

[igloo]

i just saw it and all i can say is this movie was one of the best movies evar!!!!! it exposes bush for the fraud that he really is!

Moron.....if you think Moore's movies is factual, accurate, and unbiased, you are a turd...

accept the movie for what it is by a film maker for what he is.....

[jtk4]

the movie is facts looked at by a biased source.

just like worldnetdaily

I consider him to be the liberal equivelent (sp) of orielly or most of the writers on that site.

either way i do not put much faith in it. I do not trust people that write things or make movies when they have that much hatred towards another person. I just wish there was someone who did not give a shit about republicans or democrats and just reported the news.

[mrmatas2277]

i just finished watching The Last Samurai...DOPE!!!!!!!

[jamiroguy1]

I saw it. I had no idea Bush and Cheney actually flew the planes into the world trade center on 9/11.

[igloo]

I saw it. I had no idea Bush and Cheney actually flew the planes into the world trade center on 9/11.

WHat did you think of it?

[mrmatas2277]

I saw it. I had no idea Bush and Cheney actually flew the planes into the world trade center on 9/11.

bullshit

[fresinha12]

well just from observing the crowd, the first half of the movie, everyone was laughing and sort of having fun but the minute the iraq war theme started there was a pin drop silence, it seemed moore did put an interesting movie, it had a comdeical theme but then in a shot or two became serious, serious to a point where the woman sitting next to me was crying, especiall the part where the mother of the lost soldier was confronted by an iraqi woman in front of the white house...but then the last clip of the movie was hilarious...I got to give it to george W, he knows a funny line or two...I mean it, he would make a good stand-up comic! ppl underestimate him, he throws those sinkers intentionally...and hes good at it! so got give credit to geroge W for making moores movie good!

but to address my view, I dont watch movies to get facts, i read books and dig up historical writings or statistics...i watch movie to guage what other people are watching and whts the impact of the movie on em...I do spy on ppls conversations after the movie to get a feel of wht they understood or felt....the movie by itself did'nt present anything I did'nt know.

bullshit

[jamiroguy1]

WHat did you think of it?

I have my reservations with Moore because I think he's a bit of a hypocrite and I don't really agree with him in all of his analyses but here's my review:

Some of the most memorable and shocking scenes in the movie were the footage of the troops in 9/11. It was pretty horrific to see a roadside bomb blowup around these young troops and having them carried away with parts of their legs blow off.

If not for the interview with the mother of one of soldiers that was killed in Iraq it could come off as not supporting the troops. Her conversations with Moore were probably the most touching and I heard quite a few sniffles in the theatre it was so moving.

Other more moving parts of the movie were of his footage of the wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Medical Center here in DC. His conversations with the wounded troops were fascinating. This is probably one of the most under reported stories in the whole "war on terror". The injured and maimed soldiers.

All the laughs in the film are at the expense of Bush's murder of the English language and were nothing more than cheap shots. Not that Bush doesn't give comedian/satirists ample opportunities to make fun of him wit his verbal missteps.

Moore's most artistic moment of the film was the way he presented September 11th to the audience with only audio of the planes hitting the wtc and people screaming over a black screen as opposed to showing the actual planes hitting the building. Less is more.

All in all I give this movie a thumbs up even though I think Moore is a douche bag. Thank god he stayed off the camera for the most part. I think the jest of what Michael Moore was trying to say was that the Bush administration didn't necessarily let 9/11 happen but rather seized the opportunity to use the 9/11 attacks to wage war with impunity.

[igloo]

I have my reservations with Moore because I think he's a bit of a hypocrite and I don't really agree with him in all of his analyses but here's my review:

Some of the most memorable and shocking scenes in the movie were the footage of the troops in 9/11. It was pretty horrific to see a roadside bomb blowup around these young troops and having them carried away with parts of their legs blow off.

If not for the interview with the mother of one of soldiers that was killed in Iraq it could come off as not supporting the troops. Her conversations with Moore were probably the most touching and I heard quite a few sniffles in the theatre it was so moving.

Other more moving parts of the movie were of his footage of the wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Medical Center here in DC. His conversations with the wounded troops were fascinating. This is probably one of the most under reported stories in the whole "war on terror". The injured and maimed soldiers.

All the laughs in the film are at the expense of Bush's murder of the English language and were nothing more than cheap shots. Not that Bush doesn't give comedian/satirists ample opportunities to make fun of him wit his verbal missteps.

Moore's most artistic moment of the film was the way he presented September 11th to the audience with only audio of the planes hitting the wtc and people screaming over a black screen as opposed to showing the actual planes hitting the building. Less is more.

All in all I give this movie a thumbs up even though I think Moore is a douche bag. Thank god he stayed off the camera for the most part. I think the jest of what Michael Moore was trying to say was that the Bush administration didn't necessarily let 9/11 happen but rather seized the opportunity to use the 9/11 attacks to wage war with impunity.

Good review...I am going to go see it this week.

Here is one from a conservative who was against the Iraq war:

Un-Moored from Reality

From the July 5 / July 12, 2004 issue: Fahrenheit 9/11 connects dots that aren't there.

by Matt Labash

07/05/2004,

CONSIDERING THAT I'm writing this from inside the bunker of what many regard as the Alliance of Neocon Warmongers, it bears mentioning that Michael Moore and I have one surprising trait in common: We both believe that the war in Iraq was ill-advised, ill-planned, and ill-executed, an apparent failure bordering on unmitigated disaster, that was never in our best national interest. Around our office over the last two years, I've made these arguments to colleagues, open-minded types who, after they put me through my water-boarding/naked pyramid sessions, say they'll take it under advisement. And I make the disclosure now so that readers will not be confused. I do not trash Fahrenheit 9/11 because it's a piece of antiwar propaganda. I trash Fahrenheit 9/11 because it's an offal-laden piece of junk.

It is proof, as if we need more, that Moore doesn't make art, he makes fudge. Since fact-checking his work has become a near full-time cottage industry, it is worth remembering that in his debut film Roger & Me, his indictment of heartless General Motors, he was caught fudging evictions, showing people getting bounced onto the street who'd never been GM workers. In 2002's antigun screed, Bowling for Columbine, he fudged his tear-jerking closer. While hectoring Alzheimer's-ravaged NRA mascot Charlton Heston, he related the heart-tugging tale of a mother whose 6-year-old son, largely unsupervised because of oppressive welfare-to-work laws, found a gun in her house and killed one of his classmates. Moore failed to mention that the family member Mom entrusted him

to was running a crackhouse out of her home, that the gun had been left on a mattress, and that she'd admitted beating another son while sitting on him after duct-taping his hands, feet, and mouth. Not exactly a model of responsible parenting, gun ownership, or filmmaking.

As has become my custom at Moore screenings, I began by scratching hash marks in my notebook, counting his conspiracy theories. Not only does this train the mind, but it distracts me from laughing inappropriately and disturbing fellow filmgoers. But in Fahrenheit 9/11, I quickly abandoned counting for cackling. By the time the opening credits rolled, Moore had already explained how George W. Bush rigged the 2000 election by stealing votes from black people, as well as fallen back on his shopworn class-war claptrap to imply that Bush was out of touch with the common folk, since on September 10, 2001, he "went to sleep that night in a bed made with fine French linens." (The next day's terror victims doubtless slept on burlap.)

The intro credits are accompanied by creepy acoustic guitar runs--third-world atrocity music--which play under a montage of our leaders/war criminals sinisterly readying themselves for television appearances. There's Dick Cheney getting his rake-over fluffed. There's Tom Ridge diabolically laughing. There's Paul Wolfowitz smoothing a cowlick with spittle. They smile. They have make-up applied before going on TV. Bastards!

From there, Moore offers a full hour's worth of Bush-centric conspiracies so seemingly random, disjointed, and pointless that one's ticket stub should come with a flow-chart and a decoder ring. In my line of work, when you hear this strain of rhetoric, it's usually from a man in a sandwich board touting the apocalypse or Mumia's innocence, pushing stacks of literature at you while standing on the wrong side of a police cordon. It doesn't typically come from someone whose premiere is attended by half of respectable Democratic Washington, and whose film won the coveted Palme d'Or prize at Cannes.

Moore never passes up a chance to make Bush look like a lightweight, smirking chimp. In fairness, Bush provides more than enough source material. There's Bush, to the strains of the Go-Go's "Vacation," casting fishing lines and speeding away in golf carts, with Moore informing us that the president spent 42 percent of his first eight months in office on vacation. There's Bush in a grade school classroom photo op, sitting shifty-eyed and paralyzed for a full seven minutes after being told the second plane smacked into the World Trade Center, while a teacher reads My Pet Goat. (As a friend of mine says, "Maybe he just wanted to see how it ended.")

Moore uses Bush's momentary inaction as a device to ask what he was thinking, which, to paraphrase Moore's answer, was how to cover his tracks. This allows us passage into the paranoid labyrinth of Moore's mind, which is illustrated by news footage and a string of experts (Moore spends less time physically on screen than in any of his other films, a fact which recommends it, comparatively speaking). He never fabricates out of whole cloth. Rather, Moore the filmmaker takes a perfectly reasonable proposition (our government generally, and the Bush family specifically, have been too solicitous of the Saudis), while Moore the fudgemaker throws entire trays at the wall, never overtly making allegations that amount to anything, but crossing his fingers that some of it sticks.

The insinuation is that Bush had to keep us scared, with color-coded alerts and

a citizen-terrorizing Patriot Act, to distract the country from his tangle of conflicts of interests and to build sentiment for invading Iraq. Moore mentions that the Taliban visited Texas while Bush was governor, over a possible pipeline deal with Unocal. But Moore doesn't say that they never actually met with Bush or that the deal went bust in 1998 and had been supported by the Clinton administration.

Moore mentions that Bush's old National Guard buddy and personal friend James Bath had become the money manager for the bin Laden family, saying, "James Bath himself in turn invested in George W. Bush." The implication is that Bath invested the bin Laden family's money in Bush's failed energy company, Arbusto. He doesn't mention that Bath has said that he had invested his own money, not the bin Ladens', in Bush's company.

The family members who had disowned Osama were mainstays of American business, to the point that they were members of the nefarious Carlyle Group, a fact Moore naturally mentions, along with the fact that George's daddy was a member, too. One of the Carlyle Group's investments was United Defense, maker of Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Moore says September 11 "guaranteed that United Defense was going to have a very good year." See it all coming together? Moore tells us that when Carlyle took United Defense public, they made a one-day profit of $237 million, but under all the public scrutiny, the bin Laden family eventually had to withdraw (Moore doesn't tell us that they withdrew before the public offering, not after it).

At their own request, the bin Laden family was quickly shuttled away after 9/11, back to Saudi Arabia. Moore finds it suspicious, as well he should. Who would be stupid enough to let that happen, without working them over for a good couple of weeks? Actually, according to a May interview he gave to The Hill, it was Richard Clarke, Bush's former counterterrorism adviser and the new patron saint of Bush-bashers. Moore makes use of him in the film, though he manages not to mention Clarke's role in the departure of the bin Ladens.

Here, if we're going to play connect-the-dots, a few questions are in order. For starters, are we really supposed to believe that 9/11 and the ensuing wars were a collaborative profiteering scheme between the bin Ladens, the Bushes, and defense contractors? Furthermore, will Moore's DVD director's cut elucidate Bush ties to the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, and the Freemasons? Who knows? Who cares? Moore doesn't seem to, as he speedily moves on, making another tray of fudge.

When Moore takes us to Iraq, on the eve of war, he shows placid scenes of an untroubled land on the brink of imperial annihilation. With all the leisurely strolling and kite-flying, it is unclear if Iraqis are living under a murderous dictatorship or in a Valtrex commercial. In Moore's telling of the invasion, the shock-and-awe is less high-value-target/smart-bombing, more Dresden/Hiroshima. According to the footage that ensues, our pilots seem to have hit nothing but women and children. If Moore's documentarian gig were to fall through, he could easily seek employment as an Al Jazeera cameraman.

This is, it nearly goes without saying, his downfall as a storyteller. In his unctuous morality tales, everyone is assigned black and white hats. The white hats mainly belong to the oppressed people of Iraq, subject to our soldiers' midnight raids under the jackboot of occupation, and to other victims of the administration, such as the poor, underemployed people of Flint, Michigan (Moore's obsessively referenced hometown), who serve as helpless recruiting chum for Bush's killing machine.

The black hats (administration types) seem to be motivated solely by world domination and the desire to steer no-bid contracts to Halliburton. There is no allowance for moral ambiguity, or what would've been even more interesting, misguided moral clarity--the possibility that Bush made a bad judgment call, but did so for the right reasons (security concerns, the elimination of a brutal despot, and the liberation of his people).

One of this film's only pure moments occurs when Moore spends time with the mother of an American soldier who died in Karbala. The mother is a conservative Democrat from a family with a long military history. She used to rage at war protestors, but since losing her son, she seethes at the administration who sent him to his death, crying almost animally, "I want him to be alive . . . and I can't make him alive." (But even this is sullied by Moore's smarmy, gratuitous insistence to her that "yeah, it's a great country," an obvious inoculation against charges that he hates America.)

Critics have accused Moore of milking her grief until it moos. But on this, he deserves a pass. Anyone wishing to discuss war, either for or against, should also be prepared to seriously consider its tolls, especially the human ones. Moore being Moore, however, steps on his most effective material by following it with yet another cheap stunt: ambushing congressmen to ask if they will enlist their children to go to Iraq, as if anyone can. He finds no takers, then says he can't blame them, since who would want to give up their child? Nobody, of course. Not the parents of soldiers in Iraq, nor the parents of those who died at Normandy. But few would argue that World War II wasn't a war worth fighting.

Which is not to say Iraq is in the same class. And it is why real questions should be continuously asked, and skepticism applied. The kind of skepticism that forces leaders to account for whether they've taken the right course of action. Not the crank, grab bag of stitched-together conspiracies that encourages Moore's political opponents to be reflexively dismissive--and causes the leftish reviewer sitting next to me to say, "He infuriates me because he makes my arguments badly."

There is plenty of grist for skeptics of the war to argue that the chances of a shiny, happy democracy's flowering in Iraq reside somewhere between slim and nil. But those are still better odds than the ones on Moore's someday making an intellectually honest film.

[ghhhhhost]

Moron.....if you think Moore's movies is factual, accurate, and unbiased, you are a turd...

accept the movie for what it is by a film maker for what he is.....

this proves conservatives have no souL!! i just copied and pasted bigpoppanils suggestion of what a typical liberal would say...u know..a jokie joke..hardy harr harrr

[igloo]

this proves conservatives have no souL!! i just copied and pasted bigpoppanils suggestion of what a typical liberal would say...u know..a jokie joke..hardy harr harrr

sorry.....my fault then

[jamiroguy1]

...especially the part where the mother of the lost soldier was confronted by an iraqi woman in front of the white house...

That wasn't an Iraqi woman, that's Connie and she's spanish. She's been holding a 24 hour a day peace vigil in front of the white house since 1981.

I walk past this lady and speak with her just about every day. She has an interesting story.

http://www.prop1.org/conchita/

[fliptoniaaa]

If you want to know about the untruths in michael moores movies check out his interview with matt lauer. It was really suprising but Matt Lauer all but ripped him one also check out the 9/11 commisions iterim report, it clearly states that president bush gave no clearance for the bin laden family to leave and it was richard clarke alone who gave the go ahead, he has stated this repeatedly.

the attacks happened in 2001. Clark retired from the US military and his NATO command in 2000 ,if I am not mistaken. since when do retired military personal, have any authority to make decisions such as the one you suggested?

[jtk4]

no i think clark was a holdover from clinton, he is the guy that came out recently and blasted everyone including himself.

I think your thinking of welsley clark, richard was top terrorist advisor or something like that

[howardstone]

i just finished watching The Last Samurai...DOPE!!!!!!!

didn't you just want to bitch slap the emperor? lol

emperor: tell me how he died.

Tom Cruise: no, I'll tell you how he lived.

Damm good movie

[jtk4]

ever see the chippelle show with that angry bald guy who reviews movies.

" tom cruise the last samurai"

" i got a movie its called the last nigger starring tom hanks"

Funny

[fresinha12]

the authority to allow planes to fly that day had to come from the president, its an excutive order! and just for the paralegals on this board, to make an exception to an excutive order it has to be addendumed by another executive order or a stay order issued by the supreme court. The grounding of all flights was an excutive ordered issued by the white house to the DOT!

Richard clarke does'nt make excutive orders he can recommend the president on writing one...so the responsibility and signature on that order is that of the president alone!

In the event of 9/11 a state of emergency was declared, so at that point only an excutive order would have probably allowed airplanes to fly. BTW ladens brother was in DC the day of 9/11 (according to moore he was attending a carlyle group meeting)

no i think clark was a holdover from clinton, he is the guy that came out recently and blasted everyone including himself.

I think your thinking of welsley clark, richard was top terrorist advisor or something like that

[mrmatas2277]

didn't you just want to bitch slap the emperor? lol

emperor: tell me how he died.

Tom Cruise: no, I'll tell you how he lived

werd...the emperor needed to grow some BALLS...what the hell was the deal with only wearing one white glove on his left hand?