So, have YOU seen "Fahrenheit 9/11"?

[ixnay]

Originally posted by GePap
They have it out in Montana?

According to the F 9/11 tickets site our city is one of two in MT showing the movie.

Go figure they're the two college towns in the state.

[Agathon]

From the USA Today article.

In December 1997, a delegation of top Taliban officials visited the USA at the invitation of officials from Unocal, a California-based oil and gas company with extensive business dealings in Texas. At the time, Unocal was pursuing a deal to construct a gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Moore notes that the delegation visited Texas while Bush was governor. He doesn't say the delegation met with Bush, but that is implied.

It is implied...???? I didn't see the implication or make that connection when I saw it. Part of the problem here is that people are casting their own interpretation as what Moore said.


All that Moore is doing is showing us things that either haven't been seen or the news media haven't let us see, or only let us see once. I'd never seen the eggs thrown at Bush's car before, for example.

The Saudi flights out of the US and the other stuff are worth putting in as we never really had enough of this on the news. Of course we've had endless speculation about non-existent links between Saddam and Al Qaeda – I think it's nice how Bush has been hoist on his own petard with this stuff.

[Atahualpa]

Some people here claimed that Fahrenheit 9/11 had some errors. While its very well okay to point out errors, if they are just small ones I guess the whole message is still okay. Take it with a grain of salt then, but take it. To say a movie is utter crap because of that is not fair. Why must a movie that tries to convince you to analyze the situation a bit more closely (I guess thats the point of this movie), contain no errors at all, when it does not matter so much with movies that strengthen your opinion?
Its your very right to question some content, but to deny it all is childish imo.

Otherwise some people feel like the church in the 15th and 16th century not wanting to acknowledge that the earth was round and that earth is not the middle of the universe.
Now of course I do not want to put Moore's claims as absolute truths (In fact I havent seen his movie). But I just wanted to show some links that denying information, wether its true or not, has not worked out.

Anyway to make some non serious statements:
Denying is the first stage of grief
Then comes Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance

So in the end you'll see the movie. You get angered. You try to rationalize points and bargain. You get depressed and finally accept the fact that information from just one source is not enough to give you a broad overview.

Would be funny if this works out

[DinoDoc]

I find it funny Agathon is still responding to me.

Why must a movie that [claims to be presenting the truth] contain no errors at all

You tell me.

[GePap]

It's funnier you continue to post in this thread

I love the "it's implied" bullcrap. I saw the footage he gives- I was under no impression that Bush had met with them after seeing the movie.

Though one Taliban guy gives us one of the funnier moments in the movie. In 2000 a taliban representative came to the US- at one press conference a woman goes into the plight of women under the Taliban-and the Taliban guy, in very good english, replies to her something akin to " I am very sorry for your husband, he must have a very hard time with you"

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by GePap
It's funnier you continue to post in this thread

I usually don't go off on rants in the course of responding to someone.

I love the "it's implied" bullcrap.

Personally I love the people who swallow ludicrous bullcrap like Bush's closeness to the Saudi royal family has hampered the hunt for Osama bin Laden. Especially when a better point of attack would have been to focous on the sucess sanctions had in containing Iraq and the sucess Bush had in crafting a sustainable sanctions regime along with the international will behoind it before he discarded it in favor of war. But why let facts get in the way of preaching to the choir, eh GePap?

[Sava]

Personally I love the people who swallow ludicrous bullcrap like Bush's closeness to the Saudi royal family has hampered the hunt for Osama bin Laden

it's pure fact... i love the people who can't accept the facts.

Fact: during the height of the Afghan campaign in late 2001/early 2002, the US had 11,000 troops in Afghanistan hunting for bin Laden.

Face: As Richard Clarke pointed out, there are more than 11,000 policemen in Manhattan.

Conclusion: Not enough resources or manpower were allocated to the hunt for bin Laden.

People have to be either incredibly naive or incredibly dense to not believe Bush was going about the hunt for bin Laden "half-assed". Just compare the hunt for Saddam to the hunt for bin Laden. Compare the resources and manpower put into the two.

All Michael Moore is doing is point these facts out and drawing his own conclusion. If you disagree with him... fine... but tell us why? So far, none of the right-wingers has made a case against any of Moore assertions or opinions. And nobody has brought up even a fraction of facts supporting their criticism of Moore.

Gepap: The conservatives like how the Taliban treated their women. If the RWers in America had their way, it'd be like the Taliban (i.e. women belong in the kitchen, etc).

[Imran Siddiqui]

0.5/10

[Gibsie]

You can do better than that, Sava. You've not even hinted at how Bush's closeness to the Saudis resulted in the situation you describe...

[Verto]

Originally posted by Sava

All Michael Moore is doing is point these facts out and drawing his own conclusion. If you disagree with him... fine... but tell us why?

I disagree with Moore because he takes an event that happened, leaves out important information, takes speeches out of context, adds some spin, and the viewer is left believing that is how it really happened.

I suppose it cannot be argued that Moore makes any major, outright lies. I will concede this point. He is far too adept at warping the truth to the point where viewers see a false reality, without him actually telling a lie.

[KrazyHorse]

I suppose it cannot be argued that Moore makes any major, outright lies.

Which is what distinguishes him from those who make their livings pandering to right wingers.

[DinoDoc]

Sava is a case in point.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Especially when a better point of attack would have been to focous on the sucess sanctions had in containing Iraq and the sucess Bush had in crafting a sustainable sanctions regime along with the international will behoind it before he discarded it in favor of war.

Sorry to have to call you on this one, DD, but Moore makes precisely that point in the film, in addition to his other points.

[DinoDoc]

Mea culpa to me then. That's the first anyone who's seen the movie has mention of it that I've seen though.

[KrazyHorse]

If you're going to spend your time criticising the film it would probably be a good idea to see it DD.