just seen fahrenheit 9/11 and watching it makes you realise that politicians are capable of anything and that the war in iraq is totally insane and uneccessary as are all wars, notice that the ones who start the wars never fight in them . i hope the british media/news never gets like the u.s media/news. it seems so sensational and over the top
mike moore documentary/film fahrenheit 9/11
- Thread starter nelly117
- Start date
prunkgurl69
New member
Gawd...please someone lock this thread now before it gets out of hand 
Marin3 muscl3
New member
im still with moore and what hes gotta say, i trust him and not bush and the politicians
read mike moores statement below :
For now, please know the following: Every single fact I state in "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the absolute and irrefutable truth. This movie is perhaps the most thoroughly researched and vetted documentary of our time. No fewer than a dozen people, including three teams of lawyers and the venerable one-time fact-checkers from The New Yorker went through this movie with a fine-tooth comb so that we can make this guarantee to you. Do not let anyone say this or that isn't true. If they say that, they are lying. Let them know that the OPINIONS in the film are mine, and anyone certainly has a right to disagree with them. And the questions I pose in the movie, based on these irrefutable facts, are also mine. And I have a right to ask them. And I will continue to ask them until they are answered.
read mike moores statement below :
For now, please know the following: Every single fact I state in "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the absolute and irrefutable truth. This movie is perhaps the most thoroughly researched and vetted documentary of our time. No fewer than a dozen people, including three teams of lawyers and the venerable one-time fact-checkers from The New Yorker went through this movie with a fine-tooth comb so that we can make this guarantee to you. Do not let anyone say this or that isn't true. If they say that, they are lying. Let them know that the OPINIONS in the film are mine, and anyone certainly has a right to disagree with them. And the questions I pose in the movie, based on these irrefutable facts, are also mine. And I have a right to ask them. And I will continue to ask them until they are answered.
BC *B-day July 10th!*
New member
To paraphrase Mandy Rice Davies ' He would say that, wouldn't he?'
For actual evidence of economy with the actualit
For actual evidence of economy with the actualit
mmiller751
New member
god knows why he does stuff like that.
however, a lot of the stuff against Moore is bollocks anyway.
*the gun in the bank* thing. so he had it arranged for them to physically give him a gun in the bank, rather than pick it up. so what? the whole point was that its absurd, given the level of gun crime in the US, to be given a free gun when you open a bank account. regardless of the checks carries out, it remains an absurd notion.
Moore used *actual* figures for gun crime in different countries, rather than relative (to population) figures. again, so what? if there are 11,000 per year in the US and 70 in the UK, it doesn't take a maths degree to see that its far far worse in the US regardless of the figures used. when Moore is criticised for that, the implication is that if he had used relative figures, it would have showed that gun crime isn't that bad, relatively, in the US. clearly, despite that implication, that isn't the case.
this isn't to say he's perfect - he's clearly far from it, as the newspaper thing above illustrates. but even then, there remains plenty of legitimate information which shows that there *were* irregularities in the election in florida which resulted in bush winning.
Iain
however, a lot of the stuff against Moore is bollocks anyway.
*the gun in the bank* thing. so he had it arranged for them to physically give him a gun in the bank, rather than pick it up. so what? the whole point was that its absurd, given the level of gun crime in the US, to be given a free gun when you open a bank account. regardless of the checks carries out, it remains an absurd notion.
Moore used *actual* figures for gun crime in different countries, rather than relative (to population) figures. again, so what? if there are 11,000 per year in the US and 70 in the UK, it doesn't take a maths degree to see that its far far worse in the US regardless of the figures used. when Moore is criticised for that, the implication is that if he had used relative figures, it would have showed that gun crime isn't that bad, relatively, in the US. clearly, despite that implication, that isn't the case.
this isn't to say he's perfect - he's clearly far from it, as the newspaper thing above illustrates. but even then, there remains plenty of legitimate information which shows that there *were* irregularities in the election in florida which resulted in bush winning.
Iain
i ve read the stuff against moore but i still believe him, believe what hes got to say or believe in george bush and those guys? im going with moore. i think some people are against moore because he votes for the other guy but with me its nothing to do with politics that i think mike moore speaks a lot of sense.
midnitewhispers23
New member
I was surprised that the US army recruitment adverts were exactly like the recruitment aRAB in "Starship Troopers". Made me laugh. I always thought Starship Troopers was a parody of the US armed forces. I suppose there's no need to ridicule something that's already that ridiculous.
Luckystar25
New member
I've not seen the film so I may be wrong, but based on various articles on both men I'm tempted to think that Bush gives propoganda on the one side, and Moore gives it on the other.....
maybe the truth lies somewhere inbetween....??
maybe the truth lies somewhere inbetween....??
C
carve the canyon
Guest
trouble is, only one is The Most Powerful Man On Earth.
when one loses the plot a bit, all hell can break out, when the other loses the plot, he gets a bit of stick over his style here, or his artistic license there.
Iain
when one loses the plot a bit, all hell can break out, when the other loses the plot, he gets a bit of stick over his style here, or his artistic license there.
Iain
sMILEsmile
New member
I saw Larry King interview the Bushes on CNN this weekend. Man, the guy is a doofus. He can barely string a sentence together.
And what's all this crap about believing in the "sanctity of life"?!! OK, so they're against embryonic stem cell research. That's bad enough, but it's also a bit rich coming from a man who supports both the death penalty and a war that has killed thousanRAB of innocents.
And what's all this crap about believing in the "sanctity of life"?!! OK, so they're against embryonic stem cell research. That's bad enough, but it's also a bit rich coming from a man who supports both the death penalty and a war that has killed thousanRAB of innocents.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not defending Bush in any way shape or form (I agree the man is a grade A doofus) and, as I said, I havent seen the film.
But, after watching Bowling for Columbine, Moores style seems to be to push his audience into a certain conclusion - it is not an unbiased represntation of the cold hard facts so much as a 'this is how I see it and therefore how you should see it' film. A film could easily be made showing the opposite view if we were to pick and chose which pieces of information to display and which to ignore. All governments have done it during perioRAB of war, the Nazi party thrived on it.
Moore does not give his viewer the chance to make up their own mind based on both sides of the argument and therefore loses some of his credibility in my opinion.
Thats not to say his overall conclusions arent correct, just that I think he could have given his viewer a more balanced view.
But, after watching Bowling for Columbine, Moores style seems to be to push his audience into a certain conclusion - it is not an unbiased represntation of the cold hard facts so much as a 'this is how I see it and therefore how you should see it' film. A film could easily be made showing the opposite view if we were to pick and chose which pieces of information to display and which to ignore. All governments have done it during perioRAB of war, the Nazi party thrived on it.
Moore does not give his viewer the chance to make up their own mind based on both sides of the argument and therefore loses some of his credibility in my opinion.
Thats not to say his overall conclusions arent correct, just that I think he could have given his viewer a more balanced view.
Credibility as what? He has opinions. You and I know them. That does not, however, lead on that the facts stated are wrong. A massive misrepresentation of F9/11 is that it states that Saudis were allowed to fly out of the country whilst airspace was closed. It does not say that. It says they were allowed to fly out the country after 13th September. Airspace was open then. The 9/11 report says the exact same thing.
No one should make a judgement on the film until they see it. Of course, the Bush administration said it was guff before seeing it, but they would, wouldn't they. The Bush administration attacked the release of a video of Bush's CIA head nominee saying he couldn't get a job with the CIA because he's not qualified as "hearsay" [HUH?!?!]
So just see it and then spout opinion. My opinion is here: http://schoolboyuk.blogspot.com/2004/07/farenheit-911.html
Schooly
No one should make a judgement on the film until they see it. Of course, the Bush administration said it was guff before seeing it, but they would, wouldn't they. The Bush administration attacked the release of a video of Bush's CIA head nominee saying he couldn't get a job with the CIA because he's not qualified as "hearsay" [HUH?!?!]
So just see it and then spout opinion. My opinion is here: http://schoolboyuk.blogspot.com/2004/07/farenheit-911.html
Schooly