Fahrenheit 9/11

[LostHero]

Are you going to watch it?

Trailer (http://www.fahrenheit911.com/trailer/quicktime/large.php)

[GuerillaPimp]

Looks interesting. But im still waiting for AVP and The Village. But movies like this make you really wonder what other secrets the government are hiding from us...

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-20 19:34, GuerillaPimp wrote:
But movies like this make you really wonder what other secrets the government are hiding from us...




I wouldnt take anything from Michael Moore as gospel.

[Arislan]

At the risk of spamming, I can't help but say

Dangerous,
100% agreed...

[LostHero]

He has lied and made errors before. The listings of which are available.

[Sef]

It looks interesting, but...I don't think I'll see it. I'll probably just hear about it from someone else.

[GuerillaPimp]

On 2004-06-20 19:40, Dangerous55 wrote:


On 2004-06-20 19:34, GuerillaPimp wrote:
But movies like this make you really wonder what other secrets the government are hiding from us...




I wouldnt take anything from Michael Moore as gospel.



No arguement their either, BUT think about all of the coverups about 9/11 and various head officials stepping down and all that other hooplah. You can't help wonder what else they haven't told us about anything else.

[Scejntjynahl]

On 2004-06-20 20:11, GuerillaPimp wrote:


On 2004-06-20 19:40, Dangerous55 wrote:


On 2004-06-20 19:34, GuerillaPimp wrote:
But movies like this make you really wonder what other secrets the government are hiding from us...




I wouldnt take anything from Michael Moore as gospel.



No arguement their either, BUT think about all of the coverups about 9/11 and various head officials stepping down and all that other hooplah. You can't help wonder what else they haven't told us about anything else.


Oh, sure, like only one nation has cover ups, shees. For crying out loud even the Romans had cover ups... Colesseum anyone...

[LostHero]

Romans? That sounds awfully neutral... I mean, what makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?

If it happened more than 5 minutes ago, it's already boring and I don't care about it. So you can shut your bong hole you smelly hippy, and take your romans and collesiums else where!

[opaopajr]

of course.

besides, *nothing* should be taken as complete truth. anything created from the hands of humans has bias - completely inescapable truth. we are subjective beings, are we not. but, who has compiled the better argument using better sources/data? ahh, that does not become debatable. when one offers few to no sources then you know there is little more than conjecture. moore has shown himself more than capable of offering plenty of sources to be a source worth watching. i've checked his detractors "fact checking" and they haven't shown themselves to be any better than he in terms of credibility and qualitative argument. and in fact most have been far worse. deprive yourself as you see fit, but don't think you are any better for it.

[DementorsKiss]

Yes. I agree with what opaopajr said about not taking anything a human makes as a complete truth, but I really do want to see the movie. I like Michael Moore anyway. I'm superduperliberal (wow, I just made a new word up) though, so maybe that explains it. Oh crap I can feel it coming already...noo I don't wanna be bashed just 'cos I'm liberal! Ahhh!! *runs and dies*

[LollipopLolita]

he's all about marketability and shock factor and quick grabbing headlines and shock tactics. that's about it. sadly, not a lot of people are bright enough to think on their own.

[Dangerous55]

9/11 coverups?

What coverups?


The only reason those officials are resigning is because of the bad press they will get no matter what they did. Listen, 9/11 happened. You can't change that, now let us stop blaming Bush and kill the people who actually did it.

[DementorsKiss]

Does the 9/11 Commission even have to exist? I mean, seriously, nobody in America did it, so why are we wasting our time when we could be...um...doing something else, like...I don't know, trying to find the people who are REALLY behind it? Or making cookies.

[AUTO_]

There's (obviously) a lot more going on than anything snoopy MICHAEL Moore will ever find out in his lifetime, but that doesn't mean he can't enlighten some people to a certain degree.

To be more specific:

I wouldn't really care much if it doesn't apply to you. There's too much shit going on in the US/world that Joe Dude just doesn't NEED to know.

Ignorance is bliss to an extent.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AUTO_ on 2004-06-21 13:44 ]</font>

[Daikarin]

On 2004-06-20 23:14, DementorsKiss wrote:
Does the 9/11 Commission even have to exist? I mean, seriously, nobody in America did it


It's not that simple. The commission exists to see if "it" could be prevented, and if somebody from America had indirect guilt in "it". I think the movie will spin around America's President's actions that might have had influence on 9/11.

[Madzozs]

On 2004-06-21 01:18, AUTO_ wrote:
There's (obviously) a lot more going on than anything snoopy Roger Moore will ever find out in his lifetime, but that doesn't mean he can't enlighten some people to a certain degree.



Yes, one of the James Bond's will learn us something new in this film. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

It's Michael Moore. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[LostHero]

Whose Roger Moore?

Anyway, I can't find much reason to distrust or lament him. All the money he makes from his films, is put up for poll on what charities or worthwhile causes it's spent on. To paraphrase Morris Berman, Michael is a new monastic individual - if he sells out, is something only time will tell, but something he hasn't done yet.

Interesting, how many people think our goverment is an unworldy source of unsolvable mystery and control. Our systems are made up of men. Our cousins, relatives and friends by some relation, and their systems are alot more tactile than our romantic ideals give credit to.

Knowledge enhances the way we view ourselves and world around us. The more the better I say.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LostHero on 2004-06-21 03:31 ]</font>

[Subliminalgroove]

Quick answer, yeah I am going to see it. But I don't expect any profound revelations I haven't already come across myself regarding the whole fiasco.




On 2004-06-20 22:40, LollipopLolita wrote:
he's all about marketability and shock factor and quick grabbing headlines and shock tactics. that's about it. sadly, not a lot of people are bright enough to think on their own.



Yeah, he'd make a good president, wouldn't he? http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Seriously though, he is a product of our society, culture, and government. We are ALL about marketability and shock value... just look at peime time tv...

(((Disclaimer: The following does is NOT meant as a tirade about the middle east fiascos. This is about our society. I may use examples from the "war" for the sake of discussion simply because it is still fresh in our minds. Also, bear with me. I have a valid and important point to make. But I have been terribly sick as of late. The result may be a bit stream of conciousness. But maybe someone will glean what I am trying to say from it.)))


But he IS dealing with current events. And he IS presenting views (held by many) which are ignored or suppressed by network media. The networks, and most news agencies in general, do NOT want to report things that might cause the general populace to question what may be going on (I'm not talking about grand conspiracies here, just basic questioning of society). If people begin to seriously question our government, society, culture, or very way of life an environment of instability is created. People have to decide what they believe in and what they want instead of having the answers crammed into them introveinously. The reason for this

The networks and the government want us to KNOW that there are absolutly no grey areas. Only wrong and right, Good and evil. They want us to believe that we are always the good guys. That we are always the saviors. They want us all to slap little $20 American flags (which will invariably fall off onto the highway, both disgracing the flag we pretend to revere and destroying our Purple-Mountains'-Majesty)onto our $50,000 SUV's and gas-guzzle our way to the nearest shopping mall where we can buy more Gap and Old Navy clothes then we can carry, then go pick up our perscription acne medication because we saw a pimple on our forhead the other day (and we all need to look like either Barbie or Ken, don't we?) lets not forget our Paxil because we are too frightened to face the world and other people as a result of our (mostly imagined or self-inflicted) various neuroses. And after that we need to go get some food at any American fastfood place for our big-ass meal... oh, don't forget to fuckin-hugify that . . .

What I am trying to say is, we feel more inclined to give our money to people and companies, who already have more than we can fathom, if we don't have any reason to question WHY we do things or if we should support things, or if we need a product.

So, there is your marketable bit. Everything about our country is BUILT on marketability... that is the very spirit of capitalism.

Somewhere in there is also why people like Michael Moore feel the need to resort to shock value. They feel it is the only way to remove the NBC-Old Navy-Let's buy shit-self absorbtion IV and slam their point into our skulls. The fact that most of the people reading this thread haven't gotten this far in my post if proof of that. To get a point across the 8-second attention span bridge, shock value is needed to keep us intersted.

So, I can't really fault him for the way he does things. He is merely saying things that many academics and some government officials have already said. The reason most people don't know about it or haven't thought about it is due to the fact that press conferences and disertations tend to be long and boring.


Anyway, I feel that whether you agree with him or not, it will be good to see the movie. The same goes for almost anything . . . The more open you are to things, the better you see the whole picture instead of the little peep-hole our culture promotes.

[Subliminalgroove]

On 2004-06-20 23:03, Dangerous55 wrote:
9/11 coverups?

What coverups?


The only reason those officials are resigning is because of the bad press they will get no matter what they did. Listen, 9/11 happened. You can't change that, now let us stop blaming Bush and kill the people who actually did it.



Obviously it happened. No one argues that.

The various coverups that people have talked about are how 9/11 and CIA drug trafficing tie in (google Sibel Edmonds), how muchs our government knew or didn't know, what (if anything) did the highly political and influential Carlisle have to do with it (they have connections with Bin Laden family and Bin Laden himself AND have made a KILLING off of the after effects of 9/11), and a whole lot more.

This is what I mean about QUESTIONING. There are too many fishy things in this situation. It is NOT black&white, NOTHING ever is.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-21 04:16, Subliminalgroove wrote:


Obviously it happened. No one argues that.

The various coverups that people have talked about are how 9/11 and CIA drug trafficing tie in (google Sibel Edmonds), how muchs our government knew or didn't know, what (if anything) did the highly political and influential Carlisle have to do with it (they have connections with Bin Laden family and Bin Laden himself AND have made a KILLING off of the after effects of 9/11), and a whole lot more.

This is what I mean about QUESTIONING. There are too many fishy things in this situation. It is NOT black&white, NOTHING ever is.



Is that even what the commission is looking at?

[Outrider]

I'll definitely be watching it. Not saying I agree with Moore in every way, and I feel that he'd be a lot more effective to any sort of political effort if he would calm down and stop going out of his way to piss people off... but that's not what he's about. He's not a politician.

Hopefully I'll catch it opening night. It would rock if I ran into crazy conservative protesters... but I sort of doubt that'll happen.

[AUTO_]

On 2004-06-21 03:25, Madzozs wrote:


Yes, one of the James Bond's will learn us something new in this film. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

It's Michael Moore. Sorry, I couldn't resist.



No worries, if our roles were reversed I would've done the same to you http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_lol.gif

Neither of the Moores mentioned rank too high on my list, anyways.

[Subliminalgroove]

On 2004-06-21 08:14, Dangerous55 wrote:


Is that even what the commission is looking at?



That is the point. They should be.

[DarthFomar]

On 2004-06-20 19:34, GuerillaPimp wrote:
Looks interesting. But im still waiting for AVP and The Village. But movies like this make you really wonder what other secrets the government are hiding from us...


Those two movies are going to be awesome.

I love anything by M. Knight Shyamalan and I've always loved Aliens and Predator. Hell, I even beat every single mode in AVP *FPS* for pc a few years back. I'm definitely going to watch those movies. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_yes.gif

[derBauer]

Its just a movie. People know who Mike Moore is and what he is going to say. He has the right to say it.

I could care less about him.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-21 16:21, Subliminalgroove wrote:


That is the point. They should be.



Yeah look into that stuff, not some of the stuff they are that doesnt mean anything.

[Allos]

I'm not gonna see it because it'll just piss me off. Michael Moore sees what he chooses to see.

[Bradicus]

On 2004-06-22 07:13, Allos wrote:
I'm not gonna see it because it'll just piss me off. Michael Moore sees what he chooses to see.


We all do, sonny boy.

[Subliminalgroove]

On 2004-06-22 07:26, Bradicus wrote:


On 2004-06-22 07:13, Allos wrote:
I'm not gonna see it because it'll just piss me off. Michael Moore sees what he chooses to see.


We all do, sonny boy.



Indeed, welcome to the human race. Not many of us can think outside of our own skulls... even for a moment.

[Subliminalgroove]

Okay, I just got back from this movie. Very interesting. Whether you agree with him or not, he brings up some interesting points.

There were things in there I didn't know about, and I have been following all of this a close as I can from as many angles as I can.

I suggest you go see it for the knowlege, if nothing else. What you choose to take from the experience is your choice. But it is DEFINATLY worth seeing.

[Ness]

I'm still debating about whether or not that is a real movie.

As for the Trailer, I don't really see anything interesting about it. All he is doing is exaggerating self-evident truths and point out some of the obvious fallacies of our system.

[LostHero]

I agree completely Subliminalgroove. I found the film incredibley moving and informative. Sad, how many downplay Moore for nothing more than a shock artist. He is biased, and he is un-fair; that said, it is also something he doesn't hide. It's inherent to the documentry, and in turn, he gives a subjective spin to the events and facts he ties together to create the story. The "self-evident truths" are as far from it, as the statement is from coherence. I haven't talked to any congressmen or buisness officials; I haven't done research to find the ties Bush and his constituance has financially and politically with foreign powers, which the news doesn't present to me; I haven't been to Iraq, or seen US soldiers in action outside of what CNN shows me from freedom speechs and nightcam's of explosions...
I could go on, but I won't. His film speaks for itself, and I would hard-pressed to believe someone could watch it without being even remotely changed either ideally or emotionally.

[Dyras]

My only question is: Why doesn't anyone get on Clinton's case being as his administration also knew that something was going to happen, as well as the general time frame?

[opaopajr]

Dear Dyras, I suggest reading more history about the Clinton Administration. He did a hell of a lot, hence explaining that terrorism was going to be *the issue* for the next administration. that's why clinton took the time to try to adequately inform the incoming bush administration. sandy berger, richard clarke, many other, they all were desperately trying to catch the new president's ear, but the incoming policy was "do everything opposite of clinton." obviously the focus switch from terrorism to star wars was a BIG mistake in this administration.

well after stopping project bojinka, millenial bomb plot, actually capturing, convicting, and locking away terrorists, discovering through this effective prosecution not only al qaeda, but their associated groups, as well as quelling much home grown terrorism from oklahoma bombing and such i think clinton's record stands on it's own historically as par excellence. there's plenty of *factual details* that you can look up on clinton's responses to terrorism and its associates.

unfortunately this administration dropped the ball on this big time. and it refused to admit it. and it is now again dropping the ball on terrorism, again. and is refusing to deal with it. just look at amount went into homeland security and then compare to iraq war. $1 security to $3 war on a nation unrelated to 9/11 = very lopsided policy. look at the new upcoming reports about terrorism and its increase. america had to revise its report heavily after it gave false report that terrorism went donw some 35%. later had to revise it and said it went up 35%. and on top of that that american report doesn't report on certain things. check out the british report that came out recently.

people, you really gotta do your homework, this time it means you or your loved one's lives. you have to see all sides of things, hence do lots of intense and varied research, and be a critical thinker (if you are under 18 though i won't place exorbitant expectations on you. you might not be familiar with the proper technique and laborious effort necessary to do good research. though you should learn ASAP - the most crucial skill you'll ever learn).

[LostHero]

On 2004-06-27 14:56, Dyras wrote:
My only question is: Why doesn't anyone get on Clinton's case being as his administration also knew that something was going to happen, as well as the general time frame?



Clinton was actually trying to fix the situation. Bush was on vacation, and didn't even read the report the CIA and National Security prepared for him.

Nice post opaopajr. A shame that people only think of sexual misconduct when it comes to Clinton's time in office. Although, his pimptastic qualities only raise my opinion of him lol.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LostHero on 2004-06-27 18:20 ]</font>

[Ness]

Well said, both of you.

[Phaesphora]

well, a lot of good points were raised by a very small number of people in this forum, and even that much is encouraging to a cynic like me. since i'm posting this response more for my own sanity, read no further. like you were going to anyway. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif

michael moore's work has slid consistently since 'roger & me', which next to 'the awful truth', is the best thing he's ever done. fahrenheit is his hurried attempt to get one last jab in on dubya, a man he personally despises, before the election. it does not deserve the palme d'or that it won in cannes. it is foremost a personal attack on bush, totally unnecessary due to the fact that 9 of 10 people who see the movie already know bush did not win the election in 2000, already know the bush clan spent millions in prestation pulling strings to ensure the absense of any sort of democracy in florida, already knew that dubya is a complete idiot not capable of orchestrating the corporate coup d'etats of foreign governments and company-sponsored wholesale murder.

take a look at moore's website: your assertions of hype, shock, and marketing are nothing if not correct. no headlines of 'justice will be served', just 'highest grocing documentary of all time in one weekend!' pure capitalism. from this tag it may be safe to say that he and his distributors are as concerned with profit margins as the haves and have-mores depicted in his film. it becomes increasingly apparent that he has a duplicitous personal agenda in the making and release of this film, though in my opinion this makes him no better or worse a person. he simply wants as many people as possible to see the events as he chooses to present them, in the hope that bush will be ejected.

there is one segment of the film which is worthy of recognition, and that is the footage of the dogs of war. it is important, perhaps imperative these days, for americans to see exactly what war means. the hollywood romantisation of battle has been kismet over our senses, and there are sequences in this film that all americans should experience. i'm talking gory bits. when we understand what we are doing to other human beings, the consequences of our supposed 'righteousness', mebbe we will think twice about tossing cruise missiles around so carelessly. i was encouraged to see that not all theatres were enforcing the R rating, which itself was a ridiculous decision not at all based on the climate of the motion picture industry. 'teach the children well,' as they used to say.

michael moore is a human being, flawed and given to fits of hubris. so is dubya. so am i [as an ultra-conservative living in a radical liberal community, i hear this a lot]. sadly, he could have done a much better job, and those who see it should be reminded, as so many of you already have, to take his presentation with a grain of salt.

it is what it is. each of us must find our own truth.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-28 13:04, -Nightingale- wrote:
well, a lot of good points were raised by a very small number of people in this forum, and even that much is encouraging to a cynic like me. since i'm posting this response more for my own sanity, read no further. like you were going to anyway. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif

michael moore's work has slid consistently since 'roger & me', which next to 'the awful truth', is the best thing he's ever done. fahrenheit is his hurried attempt to get one last jab in on dubya, a man he personally despises, before the election. it does not deserve the palme d'or that it won in cannes. it is foremost a personal attack on bush, totally unnecessary due to the fact that 9 of 10 people who see the movie already know bush did not win the election in 2000, already know the bush clan spent millions in prestation pulling strings to ensure the absense of any sort of democracy in florida, already knew that dubya is a complete idiot not capable of orchestrating the corporate coup d'etats of foreign governments and company-sponsored wholesale murder.

take a look at moore's website: your assertions of hype, shock, and marketing are nothing if not correct. no headlines of 'justice will be served', just 'highest grocing documentary of all time in one weekend!' pure capitalism. from this tag it may be safe to say that he and his distributors are as concerned with profit margins as the haves and have-mores depicted in his film. it becomes increasingly apparent that he has a duplicitous personal agenda in the making and release of this film, though in my opinion this makes him no better or worse a person. he simply wants as many people as possible to see the events as he chooses to present them, in the hope that bush will be ejected.

there is one segment of the film which is worthy of recognition, and that is the footage of the dogs of war. it is important, perhaps imperative these days, for americans to see exactly what war means. the hollywood romantisation of battle has been kismet over our senses, and there are sequences in this film that all americans should experience. i'm talking gory bits. when we understand what we are doing to other human beings, the consequences of our supposed 'righteousness', mebbe we will think twice about tossing cruise missiles around so carelessly. i was encouraged to see that not all theatres were enforcing the R rating, which itself was a ridiculous decision not at all based on the climate of the motion picture industry. 'teach the children well,' as they used to say.

michael moore is a human being, flawed and given to fits of hubris. so is dubya. so am i [as an ultra-conservative living in a radical liberal community, i hear this a lot]. sadly, he could have done a much better job, and those who see it should be reminded, as so many of you already have, to take his presentation with a grain of salt.

it is what it is. each of us must find our own truth.



Yeah, and he is fat.

http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[opaopajr]

though i love his use of public domain footage... ;p heh, that's worth the ticket to admission alone. fun to watch what so many people forget and what the media glosses over. heh, can't run away from the very words from your own mouth...

[Jack]

On 2004-06-28 14:31, Dangerous55 wrote:
Yeah, and he is fat.

http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_smile.gif

You've clearly got nothing to stand on if you have to resort to personal taunts when discussing the man.

[Armok]

You do know that the US government WOULD of collapsed if not for sept 11. That event nicely took public focus off the Enron scandel which went right to the top.

I also agree Micheal Moores film is a dig at the president though.

[Ness]

On 2004-06-30 05:08, Armok wrote:
You do know that the US government WOULD of collapsed if not for sept 11. That event nicely took public focus off the Enron scandel which went right to the top.

I also agree Micheal Moores film is a dig at the president though.



I seriously doubt that. People aren't going to regress into anarchy just because some company lied about how much money it was making. You ust have really underestimated the stablity of our government and the constitution of the American people (by constitution I mean fortitude). Again this goes back to my "How do you know? You don't live here" argument that I made earlier.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-30 04:41, Jack wrote:


You've clearly got nothing to stand on if you have to resort to personal taunts when discussing the man.




Oh well yeah, and of course the fact that it was proven he lies in his movies, he misdirects the audience, etc etc. That is basically all you need when "discussing" him, he lies.

God forbid I try to have some fun.

How the hell would the US Govt collapse? That certainly a new one, a stupid one at that.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Dangerous55 on 2004-06-30 09:44 ]</font>

[Subliminalgroove]

Dangerous, I find it hard to find any lies in this film. All the facts he pulls from and mentions are public record. You can simply go to your local library (one that is a government documents depository would be best.) and confirm every fact he mentioned. Every thing that is said by every political individual in the movie is DOCUMENTED by the US government. All the documents that Moore references can be obtained through the US governemt, if one cares to look. All the facts he mentions can be confirmed. This cannot be denied by anyone who takes the time to check. It is Moore's perspective and conclusion BASED on these facts that may be wrong.

While he does try to sway the audience to his way of thinking, using many means (up to and including twisting of words and clever juxtoposition) he does not lie. At least not more than any other politically active individual. The whole purpose of this type of film is to persuade. Showing the audience the facts, but he is telling them his conclusion as well. It is simply the nature of the genre. He makes no attempt to say he is portraying an objective view of these events, he is in no way saying that he is NOT attacking Bush and his administration, and he makes no secret that he has existing biases. He is honest about his intentions with this film. He is merely taking the facts and showing you how those same facts lead to HIS view and opinions. By doing so, he hopes to get you to think about it and possibly come to agree with him.

I applaud and defend this film if for no other reason than it makes people THINK and TALK about what Bush may or may not have done and what we, as a country, have done or allowed to happen. It encourages thought and debate. Something that is lacking in this nation . . . It makes people go out with a desire to learn more. Now, tell me, what film that gets the recognition and publicity of F-9/11 makes people go home and discuss current events? What widely seen film makes people think beyond how Will Smith is gonna kill the robots or how Spiderman will save the day? I know that I haven't seen one in YEARS.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Subliminalgroove on 2004-06-30 10:19 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Subliminalgroove on 2004-06-30 10:23 ]</font>

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-30 10:18, Subliminalgroove wrote:
Dangerous, I find it hard to find any lies in this film. All the facts he pulls from and mentions are public record. You can simply go to your local library (one that is a government documents depository would be best.) and confirm every fact he mentioned. Every thing that is said by every political individual in the movie is DOCUMENTED by the US government. All the documents that Moore references can be obtained through the US governemt, if one cares to look. All the facts he mentions can be confirmed. This cannot be denied by anyone who takes the time to check. It is Moore's perspective and conclusion BASED on these facts that may be wrong.

While he does try to sway the audience to his way of thinking, using many means (up to and including twisting of words and clever juxtoposition) he does not lie. At least not more than any other politically active individual. The whole purpose of this type of film is to persuade. Showing the audience the facts, but he is telling them his conclusion as well. It is simply the nature of the genre. He makes no attempt to say he is portraying an objective view of these events, he is in no way saying that he is NOT attacking Bush and his administration, and he makes no secret that he has existing biases. He is honest about his intentions with this film. He is merely taking the facts and showing you how those same facts lead to HIS view and opinions. By doing so, he hopes to get you to think about it and possibly come to agree with him.

I applaud and defend this film if for no other reason than it makes people THINK and TALK about what Bush may or may not have done and what we, as a country, have done or allowed to happen. It encourages thought and debate. Something that is lacking in this nation . . . It makes people go out with a desire to learn more. Now, tell me, what film that gets the recognition and publicity of F-9/11 makes people go home and discuss current events? What widely seen film makes people think beyond how Will Smith is gonna kill the robots or how Spiderman will save the day? I know that I haven't seen one in YEARS.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Subliminalgroove on 2004-06-30 10:19 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Subliminalgroove on 2004-06-30 10:23 ]</font>



http://www.bowlingfortruth.com


Yeah it gets people talking, good, I don't care. I am not saying the movie shouldnt be watched just that nobody should blindly believe everything he says!

[Subliminalgroove]

I'm not refering to Bowling for Columbine. I am refering to F-9/11. Personally, I couldn't give a rats ass if he lied in Bowling... I'm obviously anti-gun, so I couldn't care less.

I am not denying that one should believe him outright. One shouldn't believe anything ANYONE says at face value. As a poster above said, we must all come to our own truths. I agree with this completely. But in order to come to our own truths, one should explore every bit of information available to them before they come to their decision and they should not set that decision in stone. The world changes CONSTANTLY, and as such, our perceptions and positions should change with it. One of my biggest gripes with this country is the citizenry's lack of desire to explore and question the world around them and the things they are being told.

YES! Question what he says! Question what Moore says and what Bush says, question what I say, and question yourself as well!

Again, come to your own truth. But make it an informed truth.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-30 11:01, Subliminalgroove wrote:
I'm not refering to Bowling for Columbine. I am refering to F-9/11. Personally, I couldn't give a rats ass if he lied in Bowling... I'm obviously anti-gun, so I couldn't care less.

I am not denying that one should believe him outright. One shouldn't believe anything ANYONE says at face value. As a poster above said, we must all come to our own truths. I agree with this completely. But in order to come to our own truths, one should explore every bit of information available to them before they come to their decision and they should not set that decision in stone. The world changes CONSTANTLY, and as such, our perceptions and positions should change with it. One of my biggest gripes with this country is the citizenry's lack of desire to explore and question the world around them and the things they are being told.

YES! Question what he says! Question what Moore says and what Bush says, question what I say, and question yourself as well!

Again, come to your own truth. But make it an informed truth.




Well if he lied and misdirected in his past movie, which he claimed is all truth, there is a very good chance he lied in his new movie. Give it a few weeks I am sure there will be a website discrediting some of the stuff he claims is truth.

Yes come up with your own conclusions, I know that. I have known that.

[Siris]

Nope, not going to watch it until it comes to DVD. I rarely go to the movie theater, we have an awesome screen and sound system right here at home. I am anxious to hear how others like it though because it does look intriging.

[Subliminalgroove]

On 2004-06-30 11:04, Dangerous55 wrote:

Yes come up with your own conclusions, I know that. I have known that.



That wasn't directly refering to you, Dangerous. I know you do that. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wink.gif

[opaopajr]

but do you question your http://www.bowlingfortruth.com source? or do you blindly accept that? where's that woman's affidavit against misrepresentation? where's the bank's successful lawsuit? hmm... you'd think they'd win, because they have cameras, too, inside and would win an open and shut case. but where is it, where's their definitive proof besides word of mouth?

question everything.

it works both ways - and that is the crux of the matter. too often the onus of proving credibility is placed on liberal sources in america, but not on conservative ones. it is an issue of framing the argument. far too often conservative sources have been proven to lie through their teeth, and yet continually they do not have to defend their accusations. if you disagree with this then you haven't done your homework - study the modern mass media and history more and come back to me.

i am a registered republican and i want truth. i'm adult enough to deal with it when faced with it. and i can with full assurance tell to any fellow republican's face that they've been lied to and lied to hard by this administration. that is an inescapable fact - deal with it or run away or pointlessly try to fight against a mountain of facts. those are your choices, i had to deal with this too, but i chose the adult response. now you choose.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-06-30 13:31, opaopajr wrote:
but do you question your http://www.bowlingfortruth.com source? or do you blindly accept that?



No, of course not. Like I said, I am not going to blindly accept anything.

[LostHero]

BFT.com is objective, and considering it lists all of its sources, data, transcripts etc... I believe it wholeheartedly. It isn't like it is just some guy bashing Moore with his own opinions... in fact, he never even addresses him.

[Armok]

On 2004-06-30 06:28, Ness wrote:


On 2004-06-30 05:08, Armok wrote:
You do know that the US government WOULD of collapsed if not for sept 11. That event nicely took public focus off the Enron scandel which went right to the top.

I also agree Micheal Moores film is a dig at the president though.



I seriously doubt that. People aren't going to regress into anarchy just because some company lied about how much money it was making. You ust have really underestimated the stablity of our government and the constitution of the American people (by constitution I mean fortitude). Again this goes back to my "How do you know? You don't live here" argument that I made earlier.



Much like watergate didnt collapse Nixons presidency? Oh and the Enron scandel you should really read up on how deep it went before saying I don't know what I am talking about its. Government collapse does not mean that the country will collapse just the the predisent will change and many ministers removed.

[Allos]

My brother said I had to see it to see what a load of crap it was......wow.....I was disgusted. There were so many points in the movie where I wanted Moore to just shut up. He's just as bad as the extremists on the other side of the political spectrum.

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-07-01 06:08, Armok wrote:

Government collapse does not mean that the country will collapse just the the predisent will change and many ministers removed.



No, that is what Government collapse means. Like the Southern Government collapsed in April 1865.

[Outrider]

Just a question... didn't Moore hire people to do fact checking for him on this film in order to make sure he didn't have false information?

[Dangerous55]

On 2004-07-01 11:28, Outrider wrote:
Just a question... didn't Moore hire people to do fact checking for him on this film in order to make sure he didn't have false information?




Maybe, but I guess he didnt pay them much.