Veracity of Pres. Bush & Michael Moore regarding 9/11 events

I think Hobbes was referring to this:

[quote]Iraq before Liberation
Deceit 44

Moore shows scenes of Baghdad before the invasion (read: liberation) and in his weltanschauung, it’s a place filled with nothing but happy, smiling, giggly, overjoyed Baghdadis. No pain and suffering there. No rape, murder, gassing, imprisoning, silencing of the citizens in these scenes. When he exploits and lingers on the tears of a mother who lost her soldier-son in Iraq, and she wails, “Why did you have to take him?” Moore does not cut to images of the murderers/terrorists (pardon me, “insurgents”) in Iraq

OK, I went through all 3 pages, and will be quickly stepping out of this one, but, one quick question…

Did Bush really say that? Say what you say?

Some people were commenting on the childishness of MM’s tone. I would think that’s OK if the Prez really said that. But maybe he didn’t and this is just some childish letter he came up with for a good time.

Is that before or after tabulating his mandatory 40% vacation time :wink:.

[quote=“bob”]The details might not always be spot on but the over all effect of a Michael Moore film is. Mofangrens analogy was brilliant. In case you missed it here it is again…

I hear what you’re saying, bob. As I mentioned, I have not seen that film, so it is certainly possible that I would agree with you if I saw it. My comment was based on what I had read about the film (things similar to the passage that Tigerman quoted, above).

I agree with you that mofangongren’s analogy was a very effective one (in my opinion MFGR is one of the more gifted communicators on this board – I find he generally expresses himself with both wit and clarity). The question is whether one agrees that Mr. Moore’s films, while perhaps playing fast-and-loose with the facts, overall give an accurate “big picture” representation of his subject. And this is where people will simply have differences of opinion. shrug

Based on what I have read, my impression is that Moore’s films do not give an accurate overall view, but rather are dishonest and misleading both on a detail level and on a big picture level. I suspect that one’s view on this depends both upon how one interprets the films, and also on how one feels about the subject matter going in (which of course is often related to our overall political leanings). Do you happen to have a DVD of Fahrenheit that I might borrow? After all this discussion I am actually becoming a little curious to see it. :slight_smile:

Cheers,
H

[quote=“Tigerman”]In any event, seeker4 acknowledged that MM sometimes has trouble with the facts. Considering the fact that it is well documented that MM has distorted and minipulated and fabricated facts in his movies, it is clear what is referred to… at least to most people.
[/quote]
I did, but let me be clearer about what I meant. I was allowing that MM isn’t perfect. He, like all of us, gets things wrong from time to time, and selects information to recite that supports the points he wants to make. However, that is not the same as my agreement that he plays fast and loose with the facts in general. I’ve seen Bowling for Columbine a few times and F911 once. Of the two, F911 was the least credible and most sensational. I did not think it was nearly the movie that BFC was. Still, I didn’t come away with the impression from F911 that Iraq was ideal before the current Iraq war. I don’t think that is what MM was trying to say overall, despite any footage of a sunny day with children playing.

Last night, I finished listening to MM’s “Dude, Where Is My Country?” on CD. If you haven’t read/heard it, MM asks about 7 questions of Mr. Bush about 9/11, his connections to the Bin Laden and Saudi royal families, etc. And he does a lot of blabbing. But, the questions were really very good ones. I’d still like to know the answers to them without having to become an investigative journalist myself. I think we all deserve clear and credible answers to those questions from Mr. Bush.

While MM does surely have an eye for drama, as any good storyteller does, he also seems to be concerned with sources and references and regularly provides them.

My point about his mistakes with facts was really that, although he may make mistakes, overall, he is trying to draw attention to some very important issues. Namely, the current U.S. President pushed the U.S. into a war based on dubious goals and false information. That he lied about it before, lied about it during, and has been lying about it since. And worse, that all of this may well have been connected to some personal agenda on the part of the President.

If for no other reason, you should read/listen to “Dude, Where’s My Country?” just for the discussion of the connections between the Bush, Bin Laden, and Saudi royal families. Especially the part about how the Bin Laden family members in the U.S. were treated immediately after 9/11. Simply stunning. I still have a hard time believing that leaders in a modern, democratic country can do that and get away with it. One of the dangers of people not thinking during a crisis, or being bullied into going along just because of a crisis.

[quote=“Tigerman”]In any event, seeker4 acknowledged that MM sometimes has trouble with the facts. Considering the fact that it is well documented that MM has distorted and minipulated and fabricated facts in his movies, it is clear what is referred to… at least to most people.
[/quote]

Please.

Really? Then please tell me how you characterize this:

[quote]Fahrenheit shows Condoleezza Rice saying, “Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.” The audience laughs derisively. Here is what Rice really said on the CBS Early Show, Nov. 28, 2003:

Moore deceptively cut the Rice quote to fool the audience into thinking she was making a particular claim, even though she was pointedly not making such a claim. And since Rice spoke in November 2003, her quote had nothing to do with building up American fears before the March 2003 invasion, although Moore implies otherwise.[/quote]

Dubious goals? What freaking goals of the war are dubious?

False information? What false information did Bush knowingly push on us?

Bush lied? Where? When? How? Cite?

Personal agenda? That’s too ludicrous a notion on which to even comment.

Dubious goals? What freaking goals of the war are dubious?[/quote]

Check out the Project for a New American Century papers. Bush’s closest cabinet members who planned this war were the guys signing off on that malarkey. What? Like we’re all supposed to magically ignore that Bush and his cabinet were just itchin’ to invade Iraq as soon as possible on any pretext? We’re supposed to ignore the Downing Street memo? Bush’s pathetic attempt to search for a connection between 9-11’s religious zealots and a tinpot secular dictatorship?

If you believe everything Bush says, I know somebody who can help you buy the Brooklyn Bridge.

There you go again… :laughing:

Too easy and already discussed. It’s nearly impossible to find anything that comes out of Bush that’s the truth. Just curious if you happen to know the Iraq War chronology well enough to know why UN weapons inspectors left Iraq right before U.S. invasion. If it was “because Saddam forced them out,” then please go stand in the corner.

Bush was obsessed with Iraq in a way usually only seen in persons with peglegs named Ahab … and even those guys are obsessed with white whales, not Iraq.

[quote=“Tigerman”]

Dubious goals? What freaking goals of the war are dubious?

False information? What false information did Bush knowingly push on us?

Bush lied? Where? When? How? Cite?

Personal agenda? That’s too ludicrous a notion on which to even comment.[/quote][quote]Considering the fact that it is well documented that MM has distorted and manipulated and fabricated facts in his movies, it is clear what is referred to… at least to most people. [/quote]May I once again return this comment to you. Considering the fact that it is well documented that Bush has distorted and manipulated and fabricated facts to justify his war for oil/freedom, it is clear what seeker 4 is referring to…at least to most people.

Why don’t you do a google search yourself?

Hobbes, if you want a copy, send me your address and I’ll send you one. I’m sorry to hear that you think MM distorted facts in order to make money. I strongly disagree and I find it sad that a man such as MM devotes his life trying to expose the truth for everyone and the best some can come up with is to attack him for portraying a false image of Iraq. The footage is real and so it the current footage from Iraq. Compare the two or just try to get similar footage nowadays. Kids playing among ruins just doesn’t have the same effect IMO.

bobepine

Oh but I wish Hobbes. I’ve been waiting for it to come out on DVD here for months. There is no question that he uses all the tricks in the filmakers bag of to make his point. No stated or actual attempt at a fair, balanced, objective perspective here. He goes for the jugular and in the opinion of a lot of people he succeeds. Personally I feel a bit manipulated by his films but would not deny their impact for a second.

Dubious goals? What freaking goals of the war are dubious?

False information? What false information did Bush knowingly push on us?

Bush lied? Where? When? How? Cite?

Personal agenda? That’s too ludicrous a notion on which to even comment.[/quote]
You know, TM, sometime you really, really should put together a course entitled, “How To Not Understand Despite Lots and Lots of Explanation”. I’m sure that you could set it all up in a Sheraton ballroom somewhere, charge $500 a head for a morning session plus bad lunch, and you’d be rich. :laughing:

Oops, sorry. Almost forgot the sources:

www.cnn.com
www.nytimes.com
www.nearlyanynewssourcethatyoudwanttoco … ryears.com

You can go stand on your head, for all I care.

Yeah? Provide a cite.

I’d be willing to bet that I have followed the issues much more closely and that I have researched the same much, much more thoroughly than you have.

[quote=“seeker4”]You know, TM, sometime you really, really should put together a course entitled, “How To Not Understand Despite Lots and Lots of Explanation”. I’m sure that you could set it all up in a Sheraton ballroom somewhere, charge $500 a head for a morning session plus bad lunch, and you’d be rich. :laughing:

Oops, sorry. Almost forgot the sources:

www.CNN.com
www.nytimes.com
www.nearlyanynewssourcethatyoudwanttoco … ryears.com[/quote]

WTF is all that?

The first cite (CNN) is re the bird flu problem.

The second cite (NYT) is about what? What does it prove regarding Bush’s goals for the Iraq war and the overall WOT?

The third cite doesn’t open to anything.

:loco:

seeker4, bobepine, would you please tell me how you characterize this:

[quote]Fahrenheit shows Condoleezza Rice saying, “Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.” The audience laughs derisively. Here is what Rice really said on the CBS Early Show, Nov. 28, 2003:

Moore deceptively cut the Rice quote to fool the audience into thinking she was making a particular claim, even though she was pointedly not making such a claim. And since Rice spoke in November 2003, her quote had nothing to do with building up American fears before the March 2003 invasion, although Moore implies otherwise.[/quote]

[quote=“Tigerman”]seeker4, bobepine, would you please tell me how you characterize this:

[quote]Fahrenheit shows Condoleezza Rice saying, “Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.” The audience laughs derisively. Here is what Rice really said on the CBS Early Show, Nov. 28, 2003:

Moore deceptively cut the Rice quote to fool the audience into thinking she was making a particular claim, even though she was pointedly not making such a claim. And since Rice spoke in November 2003, her quote had nothing to do with building up American fears before the March 2003 invasion, although Moore implies otherwise.[/quote][/quote]

Tigerman, if you don’t stop providing proof for your opinion, well, I may just have to believe you.

You know seeker4, I understand very well what you are trying to peddle. That’s not the problem. The problem is that I recognize your goods as extremely shoddy.

Not my problem. Its yours.

Well, as I’ve mentioned, I’m just sharing my opinion as it now stands based on write-ups such as the one Tigerman provided regarding his deception with the Rice quote. It’s possible that my opinion will change when/if I eventually see the film, and it’s also possible that it won’t (very kind offer, btw, maybe you could bring it to the next HH or something…).

I think I basically agree with bob’s take:

This seems to sum it up pretty well for me. I have no doubt that he’s very good at what he does. It just doesn’t seem to me that his goal has much to do with “the truth”. :idunno:

[quote=“Hobbes”]

This seems to sum it up pretty well for me. I have no doubt that he’s very good at what he does. It just doesn’t seem to me that his goal has much to do with "the truth". :idunno:[/quote]

I’ll second that. I don’t think MM is about anything but MM himself. “Hate me, Love me, just don’t ignore me.”

A google search turns up plenty of information on MM’s distortions.

Even slate.com had a piece (by Christopher Hitchens, no less!) on this theme, entitled “Unfairenheit 9/11: The lies of Michael Moore” www.slate.com/id/2102723 .

That pretty much lays out the problem clearly. Of course, there are sites like www.bowlingfortruth.com , which are rather more partisan in tone.

But the fact remains: MM is an entertainer, on par with Rush Limbaugh. People who agree with his ideas will be entertained; those who don’t may be irritated (or worse); and those with critical thinking skills will just roll their eyes.

Are you suggesting that those Forumosans who find substance in MM’s works lack critical thinking skills? GAAAASP!

Are you suggesting that those Forumosans who find substance in MM’s works lack critical thinking skills? GAAAASP![/quote]

Tigerman please don’t personally attack dozens of people at once. :wink: