Moore is at it again (lying as usual)

[Ming]

See ya in 24 hours Giancarlo... next time, pay attention to the warning.

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Since you Gibsie have an inability to look at my previous posts, I will repost what I said previously

Factual error/ Lie. I do not have an inability, but a lack of desire to look through the NYP. I also thought you'd already posted the meat of that particular article.

* Moore says that the Saudis have paid the Bush family $1.4 billion. But wait —the Bushes aren't billionaires. If you watch the film a second time you'll note Moore saying that they paid $1.4 billion to the Bush family and (added very quietly and quickly) its friends and associates.

...how on earth is that a lie by any stretch of the imagination?

* Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998. Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan are looking at the idea now, but nothing has come of it so far, and in any case Unocal has nothing to do with it.

I'll need a direct quote from Moore where he says this was the only reason.

* In a "congressmen with no kids at war" stunt, Moore claims that no one in Congress has a son or daughter fighting in America's armed services, then approaches several congressmen in the street and asks them to sign up and send their kids to Iraq. His claim would certainly surprise Sgt. Brooks Johnson of the 101st Airborne, the son of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.). And for that matter the active-duty sons of Sen. Joseph Biden and Attorney General John Ashcroft, among others.

Again, I'll need to see the actual Moore quote. I'd wager he actually puts it in the form of a question to avoid lying.

*The most offensive sequence in "Fahrenheit 9/11"'s long two hours lasts only a few minutes. It's Moore's file-footage depiction of happy Iraq before the Americans began their supposedly pointless invasion. You see men sitting in cafes, kids flying kites, women shopping. Cut to bombs exploding at night.

It's called satire, dear.

So we've got two possible lies. Thank you for proving yourself to be not somewhat helpful

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Since you Gibsie have an inability to look at my previous posts, I will repost what I said previously:

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/op...ists/23542.htm

1. The New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch, a notorious Australian press baron, whose newspapers have deliberately falsified reports and harassed ordinary people in order to further Murdoch's right wing agenda. Editorial independence does not exist in these papers: not one of Murdoch's hundreds of papers opposed the war.

The film's amusing (if bordering on racist) Saudi-bashing sequences rely for their effect on the audience having forgotten that President Bill Clinton was every bit as friendly with Prince Bandar (or "Bandar Bush," as Moore calls him) and the Saudi monarchy as his successor. In general, the movie is packed with points that Moore assumes his audience will never check, or are either lies or cleverly hedged half-lies:

This doesn't follow. All this shows us is that Clinton was as bad, which doesn't excuse Bush in the slightest.

* Moore says that the Saudis have paid the Bush family $1.4 billion. But wait �the Bushes aren't billionaires. If you watch the film a second time you'll note Moore saying that they paid $1.4 billion to the Bush family and (added very quietly and quickly) its friends and associates.

So Moore says this in the film. What's the problem?

* Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998. Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan are looking at the idea now, but nothing has come of it so far, and in any case Unocal has nothing to do with it.

Hamid Karzai was employed by Unocal. Moore's claim is debatable, but we should look at the evidence. He is not the only person to have made such a claim.

In a "congressmen with no kids at war" stunt, Moore claims that no one in Congress has a son or daughter fighting in America's armed services, then approaches several congressmen in the street and asks them to sign up and send their kids to Iraq. His claim would certainly surprise Sgt. Brooks Johnson of the 101st Airborne, the son of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.). And for that matter the active-duty sons of Sen. Joseph Biden and Attorney General John Ashcroft, among others.

IIRC I believe he said "no-one has a child in Iraq".

The most offensive sequence in "Fahrenheit 9/11"'s long two hours lasts only a few minutes. It's Moore's file-footage depiction of happy Iraq before the Americans began their supposedly pointless invasion. You see men sitting in cafes, kids flying kites, women shopping. Cut to bombs exploding at night.

Which is largely true. Iraq was not the Gaza strip, or some terrible refugee camp.

What Moore presumably doesn't know, or simply doesn't care about, is that the building you see being blown up is the Iraqi Ministry of Defense in Baghdad. Not many children flew kites there. It was in a part of the city that ordinary Iraqis weren't allowed to visit � on pain of death.

This makes an inference which Moore does not make. Hence it is a case of creative interpretation rather than just criticism.

And if Moore weren't a (left-wing) version of the fat, bigoted, ignorant Americans his European friends love to mock, he'd know that prewar Iraq was ruled by a regime that had forced a sixth of its population into fearful exile, that hanged dissidents (real dissidents, not people like Susan Sontag and Tim Robbins) from meathooks and tortured them with blowtorches, and filled thousands of mass graves with the bodies of its massacred citizens.

All with either the aid of the United States and its allies or while those countries stood aside and did nothing to protect the anti-Saddam rebellions they themselves had fomented after GW1.

Yes, children played, women shopped and men sat in cafes while that stuff went on just as people did all those normal things in Somoza's Nicaragua, Duvalier's Haiti and for that matter Nazi Germany, and as they do just about everywhere, including in Iraq today.

Funny they should bring up Nicaragua, where American trained death squads raped and murdered civilians for a decade. Or Haiti, which the US has historically treated as a virtual fiefdom. Or Nazi Germany, whose leaders the US praised while they were happily persecuting Jews in the 30s.

Ho hum....

Moore has defended deliberate inaccuracies in his prior films by claiming that satirists don't have to tell the exact truth. Fair enough. But if you take the lies, half-lies and distortions out "Fahrenheit 9/11," there isn't much of anything left."

Certainly more than there is in this article, which seems to have been written by a total incompetent.

[Evil Knevil]

I'm sorry, but where are the supposed personal attacks from Giancarlo?

[Gibsie]

IIRC I believe he said "no-one has a child in Iraq".

Are any of the children of the Congressmen in Iraq? If not, then this is a clear lie on the part of the NYP, proving GePap's point.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Evil Knevil
I'm sorry, but where are the supposed personal attacks from Giancarlo?

In my PM box.

[Agathon]

I was wrong, here is what Moore claimed in the film.

MM: Because there is only one member who has a kid over there in Iraq. This is Corporal Henderson, he is helping me out here.

So there is one member's kid in Iraq.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Gibsie


Are any of the children of the Congressmen in Iraq? If not, then this is a clear lie on the part of the NYP, proving GePap's point.

From the reviews I have read, one member of congress has a child serving in Iraq currently. None of the reviews I have seen claim Moore says no members of congress have children in Iraq.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Evil Knevil
I'm sorry, but where are the supposed personal attacks from Giancarlo?

You are a simple minded person, Agathon.

Personal... and most would consider insulting.


Discuss the topic... argue the facts... attack the arguments... BUT NOT THE POSTERS... especially not after a warning.

[Kropotkin]

So, I've never read anything in this thread at all before. But when I saw it was started by Fez and the last post was by Ming, I just knew beforehand that the last post would be about personal attacks. You are so predictable around here!

[Gibsie]

So, let me get this straight. There's one Congressman's kid in Iraq, Michael Moore says "there is only one member who has a kid over there in Iraq", and so he gets accused of claiming "that no one in Congress has a son or daughter fighting in America's armed services". You have to wonder if the people who attack Michael Moore even have the vaguest idea of what they're talking about.

[Agathon]

If you want to read up on accusations against Moore, the best place is michaelmoore.com. He seems to be making a point of immediately countering the accusations levelled at the film. He's just taken Newsweek to task for a misleading article.

[Drake Tungsten]

Does it really matter? The whole "sign your kid up to fight in Iraq!" bit is irredeemably lame, whether the claims surrounding it are accurate or not.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Blue

no, yellow! Aaargh!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
One of my threads down the gutter. What else is new...

Nothing. Though doesn't "down" imply movement, sort of? It kinda started in the gutter, like usual...