Austin TEXAS
Dateline: 25 June 2004

I called the theatre to see if there were tickets for the 4 pm show of Fahrenheit 9/11.
I got put on hold, and finally someone told me they had about two hundred tickets, but told me to get there an hour early. I got there an hour early (1500 hours CST), bought two tickets, and inquired again. This time, there were around 180 tickets, and asked the guy when I should come back for the show. He said, come back as quick as you can. We got something to eat and came back , tickets in hand, 35 minutes before the show. We had to get in a LONG snaking line. Finally we got in the show, about half of a large, stadium seating theatre was filled. In minutes, people filed in quickly, and before long, the whole place was full, completely full. There was a cross section of Austin there...old, young, rich, poor, black, white, hispanic, asian, men, women. It was a diverse mix with one thing in common. They wanted to see Fahrenheit 9/11.

The movie starts before the title comes up. It speculates as to whether the past four years has been a dream or not. In my mind, I was saying..."DREAM? NAH..nightmare? YES"

Music plays a big part in the film. The music sets the tone of each part of the film, and by painting an acoustic background, it skillfully creates the emotional setting for the messages conveyed.

The themes of the film are:
1) The Gore-Bush election
2) The Bush presidency
3) The Iraq War
and,
4) How US citizens are affected by the above.

I'm 51 and during over five decades, starting with my first movie at age 18, I've seen a LOT of films. I've seen films in drive-ins, at home, in theatres, on tv...let's say, I'm a film nut. I've NEVER been in a theatre and seen any film as positively received as this one (including The Passion of the Christ). I've never been in a film that had as many spontaneous outbreaks of laughter, nor been in a film where people clapped together spontaneously in so many places, nor seen a longer, unanimous round of applause for the show at the end, than this one.

CONTENT
First off, it's a documentary. It has film clips that you sit there and wonder, how did he get these! There are scenes from Iraq on the ground during "Shock and Awe" and we see pictures that the mass media here, has chosen not to let us see. We see the true victims of war...the children with arms blown to hell. We see the crying grandmothers who have lost all their family to bombs...people who had nothing to do with the war...intercut with Rumsfeld saying how surgical and careful the attacks were.

We also get a peek at our soldiers and what this war is doing to them. We see men without arms, without legs, and finally get to hear what THEY think about the actions of the current administration.

We get to see the EXTREMELY close relationship between the Bush family and the BinLaden family. We get to see the EXTREMELY close relationships between the Bush family and Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia...in fact, it is so close, Prince Bandar is referred to as "Bandar Bush". We also get to see the special treatment that the BinLaden family received immediately after 9/11. They were allowed to fly out of the country when all other flights were grounded, stranding people all across America.

We find out that the BinLaden family and its businesses, acted as monetary angels to G.W. Bush, pouring in great sums of money into his failed oil businesses, even though, Saudi Arabia certainly didn't need to invest in someone in the US that had an uncanny knack for drilling dry holes...one after the other.

THE COST OF WAR
Only ONE out of 535 congress people, (Sen. Johnson of South Dakota) has an enlisted son or daughter in the armed forces. Moore has a Marine in his dress green uniform, accompany him to approach congress people to solicit congressmen to see if they would like to sign up for their son or daughter to enlist to go to Iraq. The congresspeople look at Moore as if this is the craziest notion they ever heard..completely unthinkable.

We also get to see the affect the war has had on our sons and daughters in active duty. Many are coming back maimed and dead. All are affected in one way or another. The war dehumanizes people. The kind of abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib is seen happening in the field BEFORE the Abu Ghraib. We see our troops putting bags on prisoners' heads, posing for pictures with them, and there are gross sexual comments about a person who has burned to death.

Perhaps the most poignant part of the movie is a mother from Flint Michigan, who has had many people from her family serve in past wars. As a result of the high unemployment, she advises young people that the military is an EXCELLENT path. In fact, her own son goes into the military and finally, to Iraq. In the early part, she tells how she is against protestors...she hates them. Then, her own son, is killed. She reads the last letter she receives from him. It is a very anti-Bush letter. She does a 180 during the course of the film. She goes to Washington, to the White House, and says that now, she knows where to put the blame for her son's meaningless death. She doesn't blame Saddam or BinLaden, she blames Bush, and with all we have seen in the film, we must agree.

FILM TECHNIQUES
The film, in my opinion, is artfully crafted. We see the dramatic arc to the Bush character from his early days before Arbusto Oil...to his days in the White House. It's not a pretty picture, and in fact, it is NOT Mr. Moore who really constructs the damning case against Bush, but the actions and words of Bush himself.

The film uses film footage of Bush and his cabinet getting ready for on air television speeches, clips from his speeches before his rich friends in black tie events, and clips of Bush "on vacation", which apparently, consumed a LOT of his time during his first year in office. We see him golfing, "on the ranch", on boats, having a high old time (yeah, I said a "HIGH" old time).

And then, we see what he was doing while people were jumping to their death from the twin towers. We see what he was doing while around 3000 American citizens were living their last few seconds on earth. When he had an aide come in and tell him "America is under attack"...he sat in a classroom of young kids, for a "photo op", reading "My pet goat", and looking around like a clueless doofus!

FAHRENHEIT 9/11...Closing thoughts.
Michael Moore should get an Oscar for this film, to add to the golden palm from Cannes.

If you check on Boxofficemojo.com, and look for the best selling documentary films from 1982 to present, Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" is number one with sales of
$21,576,018. This film came out 10/11/02. Fahrenheit 9/11 opened in 868 theaters supposed on 23 June 2004 (but here in Texas, it didn't open til Friday, 25 June, at the Cinemark theatres) and is already at number 4, with ticket sales of $8,358,000 .

The production budget was around 6 million, and marketing was around 10 million, so they are already at the halfway point in ticket sales to recouping the investment (I know, the net and gross and all that is more involved...just trying to give a ballpark estimate on this).

I personally don't know if the film will end up making a lot of money. I hope it does personally. But, from a human viewpoint, as an American, I think it is EXTREMELY important to see the film. Even if you are a Bush supporter, you need to see the documents that the president and press have kept from you. You need to see the costs of war from the view of innocent victims. You need to see what war does to the psyche and to the bodies of our "best and the brightest", and you need to see the true faces of who makes up the forces over there fighting and dying in the name of America.

I love America. I love the notion of freedom. I support and respect our troops. For ALL these reasons, I think this is a very important film...and, even if you don't get a soapbox like I do...it is a very entertaining and well done film, and the music is great!

Oh yeah, and if you're a backer of the Administration...it's worth the price of admission to get to see John Ashcroft perform his own original composition that he wrote and sings entitled..."Let the Eagle Soar"...or see him demand the makeup person "Make me look young!".

OK...that's my review..now back to packing boxes for my move...

~Code

I'm not gonna see this film, I don't like Michael Moore. I really don't care to see stock footage of such things...with his voice in the backround telling us Bush was the one who drove the planes into the buildings.

Code,

Where are you moving to?

I have heard a lot about this film. I would like to see it (if/when it gets here to Korea). I will say this much: if the horrors of the Iraq war are shown in detail, then it would only be fair to also show the horrors which the war put an end to (i.e the horrors of Saddam & his Baath party). I don't mean to imply that mistakes were not made by Bush & co. (esp. lack of the WMA). Still, there is an argument which states that the war may have saved more lives in the long run by preventing more brutality by Saddam down the road.

Also, I have read that there is more to the story about flying out the Bin Ladin family than the movie shows. Maybe his family in the US was flown out to prevent folks here in the US from targeting them unjustly. After all, just because Bin Ladin is a terrorist doesn't mean that his whole family should pay the price for his terror.

Oops. I meant 'WMD', not WMA

He doesn't say Bush drove the planes into the buildings. I avoided talking about the movie til I had actually seen it, and interestingly, it seems the most vehement objections I have heard to the movie, are from people who have not seen it.

"Don't diss the potato salad 'til you've had a spoonful" I say

btw..I don't like George W. Bush, John Ashcroft, Dick "The "Real Slim" Cheney, Michael "Savage" Weiner, Bill O'Reilly, "Can you feel the Oxycontin" RUSH Limbaugh,Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and a lot of the NeoCons, but I don't open my piehole to be critical of them without listening to them. Most of them are their own worst enemies by what they say themselves. Someone should tell these folks..."Better to be thought an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt". Sample the goods before you critique them I say.

Code, I'm sure a lot of neo-cons will never see this film and still criticize it negatively. Ignorance to some is like a warm blanket on a cold night of cold hard facts.

Ignorance??? Anyone who drinks even a swallow of Moore's Koolaid shows their utter ignorance. Boycott-Riaa has gone from a great site to find out about the goings on of the RIAA-Internet fight to a second rate lets bitch about the current administration because it's hip.

Moore. Here's a guy who voted for Nader yet bitches and moan about Bush and how he stole the election from Gore! As if Nader EVER has a prayer this century of coming within an eyelash of the presidency.

Go ahead and just change the name of the site. Boycott-Bush.com is MUCH more in line with the theme.

First of all, it's technically NOT a documentary. A documentary provides facts and allows you to make your own conclusions. Moore's film is a fictional account, from his viewpoint, of the few facts related in the film. While it is filmed in the style of a documentary, it truly is not. What it is is a commercial for the radical Left, blaming the Bush administration for all the world's woes, most of which existed long before even Nixon was president. While it may be entertaining, especially for the choir to which it preaches, it is a work of fiction.

Just to show I try to be evenhanded...here's a "different view"
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/27/1088274624204.html?oneclick=true
"Moore loathes many of his fellow Americans. Of course, he never says so in America. But, in an interview with The Mirror in London, he described his fellow citizens as "possibly the dumbest people on the planet".

According to The New York Times, Moore - who is travelling the globe, promoting his film Fahrenheit 9/11 - recently told an audience in Germany that Americans always had a "big (expletive) grin on our face all the time, because our brains aren't loaded down".

But then, maybe Moore just loathes Americans who don't like him. He seems to like fans of Moore very much. Last week, he basked in their applause.

Shortly before 4pm last Thursday, a sleek, black limousine pulled up outside a cinema complex in Manhattan. A driver got out, opened the back door, and there was Moore. A woman rushed up and said: "I'm so grateful to you for making this film." Moore said: "I'm just glad people can get to see it."

but,the same article says this:
"The film is certainly proving popular. Fahrenheit 9/11 broke box office records for a documentary when it opened in New York last week and, over the weekend, one in every two tickets sold in the US was for Moore's film.

Audiences seem to love it. At a cinema in Manhattan last Thursday, there was not a single empty seat. At times, it was hard to hear, because people were cheering and jeering.

At the end, the audience broke into thunderous applause. People also wept, particularly when gruesome images of children injured in the Iraq war were shown, and when mothers of dead US soldiers took over the screen."

That "thunderous applause" happened right where I was...and I was one adding the sounds of impacting palms to the overall din from the audience.

and...yeah, I wept as well to see the plight of this mother...and for ALL the mothers who have lost sons or daughters to the insanity of this war.

See it, and THEN blast it...I make it a point to learn as much about the people I criticize as I can. I LIVED through the Bush governorship here...LIVED here where the capital is...LIVED in the citizen where his mansion was...I watch every speech of his I can see...I listen to Mike "Savage" Weiner...I research what I talk about....I watch every public statement from Cary Sherman...

I would never DARE to rale against someone without researching completely what they say.

When I made comments about Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, that was born from about 41 years of research into the Nazis...watching home movies show of Adolf and Eva...watching every speech, watching documentaries...and, being 1/4 German, knowing what that A-hole inflicted on the German people. My aunt was full blooded German from Munich as well.

It's intellectually dishonest to blast something you haven't paid the dues to become extremely knowledgable on. And yes, Moore does have a bias...but the documents he shows are real, the footage of the war, the soldiers, footage of Bush sitting there chewing his lip and reading "My Pet Goat" when he knew the USA was under attack...yeah, that's real too. Try not to get TOO much dirt in your ears while you bury your head in the sand guys!

TYPO ALERT...
"...LIVED in the citizen where his mansion was"...
SHOULD READ
"...LIVED in the city where his mansion was..."

TYPO ALERT...
"...LIVED in the citizen where his mansion was"...
SHOULD READ
"...LIVED in the city where his mansion was..."

I saw most of the film and it is very moving. As to Bush and his crowd well its like a bad western movie. Wanted dead or alive, your with us or against us, and so on. They have it all backwards.
In a way Mr. Moore is putting our faces to the mirror very close and we all might not like what we see but there it is.
Here is hoping we join the world community in Nov.
Still Pickin'
Bill H.

Boycott-Riaa has gone from a great site to find out about the goings on of the RIAA-Internet fight to a second rate lets bitch about the current administration because it's hip.

uh-oh , welcome to steve's america where you are only allowed to post articles he agrees with. Maybe you should buy the rights to the website and then tell people to your hearts content what their opinions should be.

Like code says, watch the movie first then post something. I haven't seen it and can't comment on it. However, the virulent reactions to Michael Moore from the hard right makes me think he hits at soft spots.

I'm confused. Because you lived in Texas when Bush was Gov there that gives you the right to complain? As if someone who didn't live in Texas during that time doesn't have that right??

Where in RIAA does it spell Bush PineMikey? Boycott-RIAA.com not Boycott-Bush. Might I reccomend starting that site for the political agenda bitching and keep this site what it's supposed to be.

I'm so looking forward to the next president and hearing all of the complaints.

Liberals, Conservatives....

Republicans, Democrats.....

Ford, Chevy....

It's NO different.

Bush Administration, RIAA.... BIG difference.

btw...its just such comments as stevepjc posted that made me leave this site anyway. You'll note I haven't posted anything since my post on the INDUCE Act, which is something I also think we should be concerned about. And, this notion that this site is NOT for political discourse, prompted me to put up sites at"

http://codewarrior.mvhosted.com
http://drjohn.mvhosted.com
http://freespeech.mvhosted.com
http://kodewarriorz.mvhosted.com
http://truthwillsurvive.mvhosted.com
as well as starting a blog at
http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com

I posted the article because I truly think the movie is important...and is worth seeing. I repeat, in my 51 years, I have NEVER seen a movie which moved an audience as much as this one. I've never seen people applaud during ANY performance as much as this.., and that includes going to live performances from George Carlin and most of the biggest musical acts out there.

People who see this film resonate with it...it makes you laugh, cry, and informs you. I've seen a lot of films I paid nearly 6 bucks for a ticket to see that left me thinking I wasted my money. This one makes me want to go see it again!

Code, we all have to accept that there will be those that love Bush who will never be turned from him and the Republican Party. For these people the Republican Party hasn't done a thing wrong since the days of Lincoln, despite the oppressions Lincoln inflicted on the Northern Press to keep opposition to the war silenced, despite William McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt's blatant interference in Panama to get a canal built, despite Herbert Hoover's stupidity that plunged this country into its worst depression ever, despite Richard Nixon and his "belief" that being President meant he could snoop around on the opposition, despite the actions of the first Bush that had us plunging into another depression despite winning a war and despite the actions of the current Bush that have seen the deaths of 3000 American civilians and 600 American soliders as well as the loss of millions of American jobs.

On Friday, when Michael Moore was on the news and talk shows promoting the movie, he said that Bush was equally stupid for sitting around in that classroom after being told the second plane had hit. As President, his first priority is to get to a secure location and assess the situation and to protect the people he may be around. There were scores of children in that room, for crying out loud. If the terrorists had possibly known he was going to be there that day, they could have gotten a plane and slammed it into the school and killed innocent children. They say he didn't leave because he didn't want to alarm anyone. Please. He could have easilly gone up to the teacher and said "Something's come up, I'm not going to be able to hear the rest of the story" and left the room before Secret Service surrounded him. But no, apparently a goat story is more important that the lives of thousands of American citizens, hundreds of who were charged with protecting and rescuing the lives of people in danger.

And as soon as things were finished in Afghanistan, you notice how quickly Bush started rattling the saber towards Iraq. And despite the testimony of men and women tasked with locating Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" stating that such weapons simply didn't exist, Bush, in his feeble mindedness, insisted they were there. And then he set a deadline for Saddam to leave knowing full well that Saddam wouldn't do it, that he'd stay. When you're setting deadlines and issuing ultimatums, you know that all hope is lost.

Yes, it's nice that Saddam is gone. One less dictator in the world who wasn't exactly harming anyone other than his own citizens. Never mind that people such as Kim Jong Il, the leaders of China and Iran are allowed to go on oppressing their own people, telling them how to live their lives and building or possessing nuclear weapons that could kill millions. Yes, I'm glad that 600 American men and women have been forced to give their lives to satisfy the aspirations of one madman in removing another madman (extreme sarcasm added).

Before a few months ago, I was for the war. I was for the liberation of the Iraqi people. I'm glad they are free to choose their own destiny (yeah right, like Bush'll let that happen). But then the dead began to mount and then we found out that our leaders ordered the abuse of prisoners in the same prison where Saddam ordered the abuse of his own citizens. The Bush supporters may say "well, they did OK certain forms of interrogation, but then changed their minds" but the fact is, the order had to have come from somewhere. Private England took her orders from her superiors, who took their orders from their superiors, who took their orders from their superiors, all the way back up to Donald Rumsfield and George W. Bush. The fact that Bush is purposely mispronouncing the name of the prison shows he's trying to cover himself (Abu Ghrabiby, Grahiby, never heard of it).

I saw the light. It took nearly four years, but I finally saw the light as to what our "glorious" President really is. It may take awhile, but eventually others will see the light.

I keep telling everyone this. I voted for Bush in 2000. I gave him my blessing to run our country as best he could. Now, four years later, I see that he has done the worst job in running our country. Four years ago, when Clinton was still in office, I had a nice job that paid well with excellent benefits. Four years later, I'm unemployed and jobs are impossible to find where I live. So do I have a reason to "blame it on Bush?" Of course I do. And it's the very reason I'm not going to vote for him in November.

Uh---let's see---the Pirate Act passes the Senate by unamious vote. Again, remeind me, what does the Pirate Act propose to do? RIAA police powers assumed by the State?

right on Tom!

The war with Iraq and the chance to make a profit off it is a lame ass idea. I know a lot of people don’t like the war but they seem to forget something, the game Saddam played for more then 8 f***ing years when NATO and the UN didn’t do a damn thing, he fired missiles that wasn’t supposed to have and the WMD to bad Michael Moore didn’t start with GW1 and get shots of what Saddam did to an entire town babies pregnant, old men women, young kids all laying in the middle of the street.

There's still a lot of people in Germany who think Adolf Hitler was a great guy and that the Holocaust is a fiction and never happened, too.

There's also a Flat Earth Society who think the world is flat.

"Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is already made up."

Saddam with his two privileged sons who treated people like sh*t is an A-hole...
George Herbert Walker Bush with his two privileged songs who treated people like sh*t is an A-hole

Expose ALL the A-holes...

And, while we're at it...since Iran and North Korea may have nuclear weapons and are arguably more of a threat than any Saddam with rumors of WMD...when are we going to invade them?

I guess to get that answer, we need to go to http://www.newamericancentury.org/
( PNAC)...I think they envisioned going to war with 63 countries...and estimates have they have started with the first two (some say three)...

Looks like those who LOVE WAR...will be in for lots of entertainment for a long time if old Arbustocito's regime stays in power.

Yeah, sorta like at the "conclusion" of the Iraq War. Jay Leno joked that this was all the beginning of the Bush "World Tour" and that the next "stop" is either Iran or Syria, though I suspect it'll be North Korea.

Since this is now the Boycott-Bush site I have a question for you koolaid drinkers. Oh BTW, I'm a registered independent. I vote for who I think can do the best job.

My question.... To the Bush haters. What was your thoughts when we bombed Yugoslavia? Your thoughts about Clinton using his office to have an afair "Because he could" were?? Kerry has a decent shot of beating Bush this fall; What do you think about his constant flip flopping on issues. Or is that just a Bush ploy to discredit him?

My thoughts?

Yugoslavia attacks = Needed
Clinton = Guy with good ideas. Did some good things. Humiliated himself for the sake of a blowjob from a not very attractive kid.
Kerry = The guy cant make up his mind. A true politician who will say whatever needed to get a vote.
Bush = Corporate President. Will do whatever nessecary to benefit Corporate America's bottom line.
Iraq = Needed no matter what the reason. 800 lives of people who SIGNED UP TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND this country to help millions is a small price to pay. I am a veteran of the first Gulf War and was wounded in action. If I could go back I GLADLY would.

Who will I vote for? Considering the choices. Someone who will do anything for Corporate America's bottom line or someone who will say anything to get elected. Hard choice.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm
"Osama bin Laden

We agree that a key goal, but by no means the only goal, of the current war on terrorism should be to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, and to destroy his network of associates. To this end, we support the necessary military action in Afghanistan and the provision of substantial financial and military assistance to the anti-Taliban forces in that country."

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1219-02.htm
"Sheriff Bush, as we're all aware, has promised to "track 'im down, smoke 'im out, and bring 'im to justice."

But, apparently Osama , a way over 6 foot tall Saudi man who's on dialysis, is harder to find than Waldo, in the Where's Waldo Game. He's harder to find than Matt Lauer in the "Where in the World is Matt Lauer" segment on the Today program. They can find Saddam, deep within a hole in Iraq, but Osama? Damn he's a mystery, right? The fact the BinLadens were the sugar daddy funding Dubya's failed Arbusto oil business surely wouldn't affect things...the fact that there are estimates that the Saudi's own about 7 percent of the good old USA couldn't impact things now could it?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2098810/
"Outside Bush's head, his statements keep crashing into reality. Tuesday night, ABC's Terry Moran reminded him, "Mr. President, before the war, you and members of your administration made several claims about Iraq: that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators with sweets and flowers; that Iraqi oil revenue would pay for most of the reconstruction; and that Iraq not only had weapons of mass destruction but, as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said, 'We know where they are.' How do you explain to Americans how you got that so wrong?"

Inside Bush's head, however, all is peaceful. "The oil revenues, they're bigger than we thought they would be," Bush boasted to Moran, evidently unaware that this heightened the mystery of why the revenues weren't covering the reconstruction. As to the WMD, Bush said the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq had confirmed that Iraq was "hiding things. A country that hides something is a country that is afraid of getting caught." See the logic? A country that hides something must be afraid of getting caught, and a country afraid of getting caught must be hiding something. Each statement validates the other, sparing Bush the need to find the WMD."

If he weren't driving us all off the virtual cliff , this doofus would be funny...but having a madman driving a bus with delusions of grandeur is always more scary than funny. "God told me to" is a scary rationale for making decisions...because, people have claimed direction from God as their reason for doing some pretty horrible things to their fellow humans.

I'm voting for Michael Badnarik.

Yeah...let's keep constant war and kill off all our kids...poison the environment, nuke 'em all and let God sort 'em out.

Think I'll scrape together another 12 bucks and take my wife out to see the film again today. We LOVED IT!

Firstly, Clinton had support with the world to bomb Kosovo. He didn't attack a sovereign nation without everyone else lining their ducks in a row. His personal life is constantly attacked but that was his own. While I don't agree with that part of his presidency and how much validity it was given with the media, it's not as if no one else hasn't ever discussed what he was doing.

Iraq was needed, eh? Last I thought the US should have been going after the Taliban in Afghanistan. Or is it because that slipped off the New York Times news radar, that means it's out of your thoughts as well?

There's a lot of tyranny in the world. Who are we (the US) to try to stop it all? Who is next? Korea? Finally stop that Armistice that's been holding it "together" for the last 50 years? Cuba and the pact we made to not invade that country?

Stevepjc, I ask that you stop with the rhetoric. You make an assumption that people hate Bush when there is criticism of how he runs the country.
This site is mainly about abuse of power. That's what I get as the main theme. for you to come around and say that someone shouldn't post about Bush abusing the Commander-in-Chief power he has to tell young men to die for their job and country, is sheer lunacy.

I for one support learning more than just music. In the end, what you know CAN hurt you. And I thank Code for taking time out to write about this so that perhaps a few thousand people can go out and criticize the movie and its director with their own point of view.

stevepjc- Thank you for your service to our country.

I have a friend Mike in Iraq right now.

And, don't worry, with things going like they are..Bushy and Rummie will probably be needing your help again. Wars and rumors of wars...I read that somewhere...oh yeah, it marks the end time...Christian Bible~

What I'm saying is rhetoric.

That's enough for me. Hey I just closed down the BullshitHallofFame.com website. If the powers that be want to develop the site I'll give them a good price for the domain name. Then they can redirect Boycott-Riaa.com there since it's much more fitting.

Shame... This site has been on my favorites for quite some time. The constant politicizing of this site makes it not worth visiting anymore for me. All good things must come to an end.

RIAA is evil. Blame it on Bush!

Indy Music is GOOD! Blame it on Bush!

Bye

LOL..with all this negativity...think I'll put up some websites just to promote his film...and, even though it's about to pour down rain here in the Live Music Capital of Texas...go see the movie AGAIN!

Ya know...the web is still wide open for development. If I can put up sites...anyone can put up sites. You favor Bush? Put up a pro bush site.
You don't like the RIAA and don't want any other discussion than that...
put up an ALL ANTI-RIAA site and block anyone posting anything else...it's your choice.

This is probably the last article I will put up here for a long time....

As I always say...it is far easier to curse the darkness than light a candle.

I just wish that people who want a site that ONLY rales against the RIAA would put their own money on the line, write their own code, and maintain it themselves.

If they don't do that, they must not really care about the issue as much as they protest they do.

If you don't want to see the movie because you don't want to support Michael Moore, hey, get a bootleg of it on the internet. j/k.

But seriously folks, a lot of it is very amusing, like Roger and Me. It's worth seeing. If you don't see it, you can't legitimately criticize it. Or, maybe you don't want to expose yourself to any information which might challenge your beliefs. Are you familiar with the concept of "cognitive dissonance" (holding two conflicting thoughts produces a state of tension or discomfort -- "dissonance"). People are motivated to reduce this dissonant feeling. One way is to avoid any information which may produce the feeling. Buck up and face your fear!
------------------------------------------
Code, I missed the first 5 minutes of the movie (I came in when the disenfranchised voters were presenting something(?) in the Senate. Can you please tell me what I missed. You are so good at giving details.

sigh, I miss the good old days when there was a single focus on this site

See ya later, code

You sure stirred up the pot today.

Just my two cents.. I'm not going to see the movie, but I'm not going to rip on it either (just Michael Moore like I always have). I don't like being packed movie theatres, especially with people clapping at the screen. For the most part I have found that with many things in life the majority of people are not the smartest bunch. I will avoid finding my way into the herd of people going to the movie. I am a bit curious, but that's the whole purpose of hype (Titanic and Pearl Harbor got hype too, and we all saw what happened to those.. well except me, I didn't see those either). I may rent it some day. Probably not though.

Compmore, it'll get back on track as soon as everybody gets the political poison out of their bloodstreams after November. I can't wait for november...cooler weather, both football and hockey in full swing, crappy baseball over and forgotten about.

Later steve.
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

pinemikey sadly I doubt it. the political pandoras box is open. It's pretty sad when people rant about free speech and then create a scene and leave the site because views and opinions are expressed they don't agree with. It's a shame too because there's so much intellegence and ability here to tap into.

Cognative dissonance.

I learned about that in an ethics class. It happens when there is a conflict in two directions.

Rather than choose a side, a person will get panicky. They'll yell or make assumptions like "WELL YOU'LL GO TO HELL BECAUSE YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

It took me some time to put up several sites with discussion boards...some based on PhPNuke, some on Invision Power Board, (I did some with phpBBB, but I found it to be a quirky prog that didn't work well for me)...and they are open to all points of view.

I have established threads about politics, the economy, health care, employment issues, you name it.

I don't censor my boards or try to control the commnets (other than asking people to be civil and try to make truthful statements).

Compmore...you know I've been at this site over a year and as one of the news team, I don't think ANYONE has consistently written more anti-RIAA articles than me. I don't think anyone has written more letters to leaders than me. But, when I see the Supreme Court say we don't have the right to remain silent if a cop asks our name, that we can , per a district court ruling, have warrantless searches of our homes, our cars, etc., When Echelon, Carnivore, TIA (formerly Total Information Awareness, unde the direction of a convicted felon, John Poindexter, now called the "Terror Information Awareness" and the pending "Virtual Case File" program of the FBI for online surveillance is running rampant....when the FBI visits mister Mike Zinna (jeffcoexposed.com) four times because they don't like his cartoons online...when the Secret Service comes and hassles Mike Moore just for standing across the street from the Saudi embassy....when a small pro-peace group comprised of old fogies like me finds out by accident that one of their members was actually a man with a different name that was a law enforcement officer who had infiltrated their group (these folks were the least dangerous old folks you've ever seen)...when they regularly hassle John Young of cryptome.org because they don't like him posting documents on his website....

when all these things are happening....it is hard, if you give a damn about this country, to sit by and NOT say something. I personally have no cognitive dissonance. I say the same things offline I say online and talk with regular people every day who believe the same things I do.

It was out of deference to Larry that I chose to take my political ramblings to my other sites...

I thought that since the show was in the news, that since I had seen it, and been with 300 other people who seemed to share my reaction, that it was worthy of coming back and talking about...but obviously, the blinders are here to stay and I probably should go back where I belong.

The RIAA are a-holes, but they don't listen to every phone call I make, nor track every credit card transaction I make. This government DOES. So, with that, I bid a fond farewell.

Don't worry about Big Brother..he's doing great...

btw...compmore...horses with blinders on have that single focus you talk about..and they are being driven in captivity by their masters....

Have a great Sunday folks....movies, here I come.

(shakes head sadly)

Steve, I hope you reconsider when you calm down. This site has an abundance of Bush haters. Moore is their new mouthpiece. And I would also suggest that the majority of those watching the movie with Code were democrats. I am an independant. I hope to see the film soon. I will be well aware that the film has a partisan theme! Doesn't mean I won't be laughing, but I doubt I will applaud.

I think there is value in however many political sides we represent being able to speak their minds. I think if we allow each other to be whichever political party they care to be, and leave the childish remarks unpoken, then maybe we can get back to figuring our next move, cause it was all the senator a**holes who just screwed us royally. I would love to see each one of them voted out of office.

Yes, politics affects this site completely. It doesn't have to divide us. Hey, have a little respect for each other is all I am saying.

I respect the pro-Bush people and their right to an opinion. So long as the discussion that follows is somewhat intelligent, then I'm all for it. But once we start making derisive comments about the intellectual capacity of someone because of their stance, then the discussion is no longer intelligent.

I do not hate the pro-Bush people. I consider them misguided, but I do not challenge their mental capacity, only that of our President. It's like I keep saying, I was pro-Bush for three years. Now I'm anti-Bush, which is my right. I look at the FACTS and make a decision, something that everyone should do. I never look at one side. I view both sides. It's something we should all do.

Since we are in a big fit about politics on here, I figure I may as well say something.

My big beef was a slant in the articles only. I could not care less what is said below them (although I may argue with what is said below them). This article is certainly slanted, but it also written in the first person and it is extremely clear that the article was written by Code and that it contains Code's opinion. My only problem is when an article appears to be factual/journalistic in nature but in reality is very biased toward one side or another.

That being said, I am glad I read the article. It was good & insightful. Also, pinemikey - there might not be any hockey in the fall

Man, I'm all for peace and love but lets be realistic.
I should have known that an artistic site would be a place for librals spewing thier opinions. Is there any place I can go where artists can get together and not bitch all day? Of course not. I guess I'm just sunk.

"Michael Moore's red-hot documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" earned more in its first three days of release across North America ...."

You know...it really pisses me off! Everytime they talk about music or movies...they always have to start off with how damn money it earned!!! GRRRRR!!!

It's that greedy, fuckin corporate mindset that have polluted us all with. Everything they discuss is about dollars and cents. Why don't they leave that shit until the end.

I was reading the other day about some of the new albums that are out...very little mention of the artistic side but god the words, "sold", "sell","earned", and others were mentioned in every damn sentence.

What the hell have we become?..the Feringee?

Well, it does get old hearing that Bush has ties with Bin Laden AND with Nazis. I have to laugh when I read that stuff. It's so looney. It could go in a comic strip, but instead it becomes a topic of serious discussion somehow.

Did it earn more than Titanic and Superman? The #1 and #2 greatest movies ever made in the history of the world?

A friend of mine broke up with his gf because she wouldn't stop praising Michael Moore and Al Franken. haha. That's the stuff.

this is serious discussion ? you gotta be kidding

i have no problem with an artical like this its codewarriors opinion piece and i read it as such . everyone is entitled to thier opinion but for crying out loud its just that an opinion. I wont go see the movie because ive watched all the interviews that have been out this week with Moore and he says himself he wants to remove bush and the movie is edited to that end . im sure there are a few people here that can edit footage to make a slanted opinion seem like fact but the interviews with michael moore told me all i need to know

Throw me a bone and stop calling Michael Moore's work documentaries. Even he doesn't call them that. He only claims to be a film maker. He's entertaining and I enjoy his films but they simply are not documentaries.

Michael Moore and I have one goal in common - Bush out of office.

There is a reason that this country needs morons like Michael Moore. A lot of pro-Bush people don't see past the war. They are oblivious to the current civil rights situation. Michale Moore, no matter how stupid he is, is still smart enough to get a good amount of even dumber Americans following him. While these Americans will still say things like "Bush said there was a link between al-qaeda and Iraq," which he never did, they will still vote against him which is what really matters.

we're polarizing this between pro bush and antibush forces. what about the vast majority of Americans in the middle who are neither. I'm one of them. we are so damn sick of partisan bickering.

both conservitive and liberal extreamists are offensive to me. I saw a movie critic that was anti bush on TV claim he was so disgusted with Moores movie he said it almost made him want to go to the defense of the president.

Just like those who are pro Bush will be offended by this movie, those who are anti Bush will love it reguardless of the truthful nature. the rest of us Americans will walk away either disgusted, amused, thoughtful or more than likely a combination of all three.

I despise michael moore so badly that as a rule I won't even talk about him. come to think of it that's probably what I'm going to do now.

as to the questions of whether it is a documentary or not, and the one about how successful it has been...here's an article talking about both....

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/27/box.office.ap/index.html
"'Fahrenheit 9/11' breaks records
Sunday, June 27, 2004 Posted: 5:58 PM EDT (2158 GMT)



Michael Moore talks with Lila Lipscomb, who lost a son in Iraq.


Gateway Big Screen Tvs
Gateway big screen televisions range from 23 to 50 inches and are available in...
www.gateway.com

Big Screen Tv: Compare Prices
Compare prices from over 30,000 stores. At BizRate.com, find deals, consumer...
lite.bizrate.com

Is Front- or Rear-Projection Better?
Before you buy a big screen TV, check out your options for a front-projection...
www.projectorcentral.com

TV Big Screens at Shopping.com
Find, compare and buy products in categories ranging from standard televisions...
www.shopping.com



VIDEO
CNN's Daryn Kagan talks to Michael Moore about his movie.

PLAY VIDEO


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Critic says "Fahrenheit 9/11" doesn't maintain a viewpoint.

PLAY VIDEO


RELATED
Audio Slide Show: 'Fahrenheit 9/11' premieres

• Review: 'Fahrenheit' a powerful, fiery film

BOX OFFICE TOP 10
Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.BR>
2. "Fahrenheit 9/11," $21.8 million
2. "White Chicks," $19.6 million
3. "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story," $18.5 million
4. "The Terminal," $13.9 million
5. "The Notebook," $13 million
6. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," $11.4 million
7. "Shrek 2," $10.5 million
8. "Garfield: The Movie," $7 million
9. "Two Brothers," $6.2 million
10. "The Stepford Wives," $5.2 million


YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
Movies

Documentaries

Michael Moore

or Create your own

Manage alerts | What is this?


LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" took in a whopping $21.8 million in its first three days, becoming the first documentary ever to debut as Hollywood's top weekend film.

If Sunday's estimates hold when final numbers are released Monday, "Fahrenheit 9/11" would set a record in a single weekend as the top-grossing documentary ever outside of concert films and movies made for huge-screen IMAX theaters."

Of course this was featured in my codewarriorz.blogspot.com
blog, along with this bit of news...
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/27/cia.book/index.html
"CIA insider slams Bush antiterror policies
Sunday, June 27, 2004 Posted: 2:53 PM EDT (1853 GMT)

(CNN) -- A book written by a top CIA counterterrorism official alleges that the Bush administration has bungled the war on terror, and because of poor decisions the United States faces a choice in Iraq and Afghanistan "between war and endless war."

Written by a high-level counterterrorism expert and published under the name "Anonymous," the book "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror" is unique in that it was written by an official still working for the CIA.

And with the book slated to be released next week, the author has already appeared -- in shadow -- on a Sunday political talk show to defend his work.

On ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopolous," the author accused some senior officials in the U.S. intelligence community of "a great deal of moral or bureaucratic cowardice" in dealing with the war on terror."

It beat White Chicks? Wow. It's still not a documentary.

gee compmore, that's a pretty fair size up.

I look at it this way. I didn't like bill clinton but rush limburger made a career out of bashing him. He didn't have anything productive or creative to add, he just bashed clinton. that really kinda made me dislike rush as much as clinton. when clinton left office rush's career really took a hit. it will be the same with this other sack of fat. the apex of his ability is to knock what someone else is doing and he can't even be original in doing that. how long do you think he will last when bush is gone?

True Captdunsel. It's always easier to tear down than to build up.

I find hillariously hypocritical that Moore can in the same film bash bush for not preventing 9/11, and then attack him for trying to prevent it from ever happening again.

A lot of people found out that they had excellent hindsight after 9/11. "You should have prevented it! Look at the results since you didn't!"

There's no way to win the battle. As soon as an attack occurs, you have "failed to prevent it" and everyone will want to know why. Then they will watch FoxNews and CNN and become experts in foreign policy and intelligence analysis. Then they will say "See? Look! Look Bush! There was "terrorist activity!" They only stop bitching to stuff more potato chips in their mouth. I'll end this post with the typical disclaimer that I do not love Bush and I am not pro-destroying freedom as we know it.

Good news! Bush's poll numbers are up. I just thought people want to hear good news. I heard them talking about it today on the pundit roundtables.

Now seriously, I think anyone who sees this film without being armed in advance about the distortions, will not be able to properly process it. Since I haven't seen the film, I won't critique it, but here is what has been posted at the slate.com website by Christopher Hitchens (not a conservative -- he used to write for The Nation, for cryin' out loud) -- about the inaccuracies of this piece of fiction titled Fahrenheit 9-11.

BEGIN QUOTE
We are introduced to Iraq, "a sovereign nation." (In fact, Iraq's "sovereignty" was heavily qualified by international sanctions, however questionable, which reflected its noncompliance with important U.N. resolutions.) In this peaceable kingdom, according to Moore's flabbergasting choice of film shots, children are flying little kites, shoppers are smiling in the sunshine, and the gentle rhythms of life are undisturbed. Then—wham! From the night sky come the terror weapons of American imperialism. Watching the clips Moore uses, and recalling them well, I can recognize various Saddam palaces and military and police centers getting the treatment. But these sites are not identified as such. In fact, I don't think Al Jazeera would, on a bad day, have transmitted anything so utterly propagandistic. You would also be led to think that the term "civilian casualty" had not even been in the Iraqi vocabulary until March 2003. I remember asking Moore at Telluride if he was or was not a pacifist. He would not give a straight answer then, and he doesn't now, either. I'll just say that the "insurgent" side is presented in this film as justifiably outraged, whereas the 30-year record of Baathist war crimes and repression and aggression is not mentioned once. (Actually, that's not quite right. It is briefly mentioned but only, and smarmily, because of the bad period when Washington preferred Saddam to the likewise unmentioned Ayatollah Khomeini.)

That this—his pro-American moment—was the worst Moore could possibly say of Saddam's depravity is further suggested by some astonishing falsifications. Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even threatened (his words) any American. I never quite know whether Moore is as ignorant as he looks, or even if that would be humanly possible. Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Munich and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer. Saddam boasted publicly of his financial sponsorship of suicide bombers in Israel. (Quite a few Americans of all denominations walk the streets of Jerusalem.) In 1991, a large number of Western hostages were taken by the hideous Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and held in terrible conditions for a long time. After that same invasion was repelled—Saddam having killed quite a few Americans and Egyptians and Syrians and Brits in the meantime and having threatened to kill many more—the Iraqi secret police were caught trying to murder former President Bush during his visit to Kuwait. Never mind whether his son should take that personally. (Though why should he not?) Should you and I not resent any foreign dictatorship that attempts to kill one of our retired chief executives? (President Clinton certainly took it that way: He ordered the destruction by cruise missiles of the Baathist "security" headquarters.) Iraqi forces fired, every day, for 10 years, on the aircraft that patrolled the no-fly zones and staved off further genocide in the north and south of the country. In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam. In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge. Its official media regularly spewed out a stream of anti-Semitic incitement. I think one might describe that as "threatening," even if one was narrow enough to think that anti-Semitism only menaces Jews. And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war. On Dec. 1, 2003, the New York Times reported—and the David Kay report had established—that Saddam had been secretly negotiating with the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il in a series of secret meetings in Syria, as late as the spring of 2003, to buy a North Korean missile system, and missile-production system, right off the shelf. (This attempt was not uncovered until after the fall of Baghdad, the coalition's presence having meanwhile put an end to the negotiations.)

Thus, in spite of the film's loaded bias against the work of the mind, you can grasp even while watching it that Michael Moore has just said, in so many words, the one thing that no reflective or informed person can possibly believe: that Saddam Hussein was no problem. No problem at all. Now look again at the facts I have cited above. If these things had been allowed to happen under any other administration, you can be sure that Moore and others would now glibly be accusing the president of ignoring, or of having ignored, some fairly unmistakable "warnings."
END QUOTE

Did anyone take note of Russian leader Putin's comments about ten days ago that Russian intelligence had warned USA about Iraq planning of direct attacks on American soil? Has anyone asked Moore about that?

What about the "Seventeenth Quaterly Report of UNMOVIC..." (UNMOVIC is the UN WMD inspection team) about finding the remnants of Saddam's WMD program now distributed in various parts of the world. There WERE WMD's and a WMD program. The evidence has been found. But Moore and most of the press are ignoring it.

I guess the danger is that if Americans are, as Moore suggested, "just about the dumbest people on the planet," then they might mistake psychedelic fantasies like Moore's movie for something vaguely resembling reality. It is not. Moore is a head case.

I am all for fair criticism of the Bush administration's handling of the war on terror. You may find this hard to believe, but even Rush Limbaugh has expressed some sympathy to the point of view that Iraq should not have been the second point of attack after Afghanistan. But that does not mean there isn't a fine case to be made. From all I've heard, there is absolutely nothing fair about this movie, period.

As a father of a soldier who just returned from serving in Iraq, I concur on some of the points in the film (I just returned from seeing it about 2 hours ago, and I have spent the last 2 hours reading reviews of it.)
First, Halliburton has basically been running the show over there. My son’s company has been escorting convoys of Halliburton trucks. In going through “hot zones”, the escorts wanted to drive quickly through, but the Halliburton drivers who, incidentally, make over $120,000 a year, and work a 40-hour work-week, dictate to the soldiers how fast they want to drive, when they want to go, and which routes they wish to take. The soldiers, ever more cautious from experience, must obey them.

The soldiers from my son’s company were there for over 30 days with only 2 bottles of water issued per day, no place to sleep, HUMMVEE’s with no armor (they only recently got those, after over a year) , and hardly any food. Not to mention that the soldiers were denied medical care unless they were on death’s door. All of this in 140 degree weather. I give you these facts not just as a father of a soldier, but as being the head of a family support group for the civilian soldiers (National Guard), I have been in touch with all of the families and most of the soldiers of my son’s company. I will back anything I say with all of the facts.

Anyone who disputes the favoritism towards Halliburton in Iraq is plain wrong. They have been in bed with the Bush administration since Day One. They didn’t even win a bid, they just received a contract, sidestepping the legal procedure for winning a government contract.

The many criticisms I have read today about Fahrenheit 9/11 have questioned the lack of providing both sides of the issues. I agree Michael Moore could have done better on this. However, I find it interesting that the critics of this film failed to produce any documented evidence to substantiate their side. They all seem to be saying that Michael Moore is a hack, he is slipshod, and that he is one sided. OK, fine, Mr. Critic, if you are so goddam quick to blast this film, do some research on your own, give me some footnotes, references, or quotes. So far Michael Moore seems to be winning.

pianotx I totally agree with the halliburton control over there. My son is also in Iraq. he was due home in April but got extended. he was wounded in an RPG attack a couple weeks ago and is back on duty. He has no idea when He's coming home. I am soooo glad your son is home ok. I have a different slant politcally but we both have that common fear. my best to your son and your family

Absolutely pianotex! This is what I say too. If Michael Moore's critics are so convinced his film is full of shit..then where's all info substantiating such?

Thank you, Compmore. I sincerely hope your son fully recovers from his injuries. I hope and pray for his safe return home soon, as well as all of our soldiers. It’s not easy being a military parent, is it?

no it's not easy. I'm not exactly a military parent. I'm still waiting to meet my son. He contacted me for the first time a few months before they sent him over. So I really don't have the usual claim but the feelings are still there. thanks he's recovered fine. he acts like it's no big deal LOL

pianotex -- thank you for sharing your information. I know the guys and gals over there are doing a hard job and I appreciate it. They deserve better than this nightmare.

Mike Moore's next film he says will target the drug and HMO industry. Should be good.

As far as Haliburton. They've got to be crazy wanting to go over there. With all the beheadings taking place, I would think that no money in the world would be worth the risk of such a job, even if it does pay 120 grand a year for most. Back in the 80's my sister went to Saudi Arabia because of the money. Well, after a few years she figured out it just wasn't worth it. So, perhaps in time maybe it will be seen as a blessing in disguise that other companies didn't get the chance to bid and go there. This could very well end up being the demise of Haliburton. Ya just never know. Maybe we should send the RIAA over there. Bet they'd get things straightened out.....

Oh and Code.....We do and will miss you!

comp, howcome you haven't met your son?

you know, why does everyone get all pissy at code? i think that just RIAA stuff would be boring. I go to this website for news as much as the news websites because it at least puts me onto things important to me. If you don't like it, piss up a fucking rope and leave. freedom of pressing the "X' at the top-right hand corner of you window. amazing technology huh? don't worry. that technology won't last long with the induce act. also, i haven't seen the movie, when i'm not broke i will. i'm 22 yr/old and give a shit about the state of my country. i have to live a long time with the bullshit that is going on today. if we can't ensure american freedoms, why the hell are we "freeing" other countries. Fuck them!!! if all of them died today, i'd care less. wouldn't loose one second of sleep. but i do over our soldiers and sailors. my wife is still in the navy. most of her friends disagree with me. they're just like steve, don't want to see anything that messes up their pretty little world. well i do! i want to know what the hell is going on. Communist News Network won't tell you. Good day all and don't stop posting code...if you care what everybody thinks, you'll go crazy...care about your friends and family and political events and fuck your enemies. nomally i try not to cuss, but i'm in a damn pissy mood lately, sorry.

long story sherm. I didn't know if he was mine. his mother made it impossible to find out so I had to wait for him to grow up and contact me. that's as condensed as I can get it but the emotions make it hard to go further

mmnuc3 no one is mad at code as far as I know. He's the one who wants to leave. as far as the profanity that's what helps lose credibility to our cause.

You come here and get all upset about people "being pissy at code" and tell them to leave, all the while you're being pissy everyone else yet for some reason, you didn't leave either. You have a freedom to press the "X" at the top-right hand corner of your window, right? Talk about being a hypocrite. Damn.

I do agree that Code should not stop posting though. Code - you told me you know what it's like to stand up to a lot of people and be the only one. You getting bitched at is simply a byproduct of you posting the article and then defending it numerous times below. The movie highly political, so people are going to get P.O'd. If you're at the center of the discussion, you'll take the brunt of the hits. Did someone tell you to stop posting? Don't stop posting. I made a post quite a ways above about my view point on the "liberalness" here about 2/3 of the way down (at 2:59pm). I liked this article. It was interesting to read your point of view after seeing the movie.

Interesting posts. Pro- Bush, Anti-Bush, we all know without a doubt that there are people out there that could make a movie making Bush look like Snow White.

Another thing I think we can also all agree upon, is that Michael Moore and the Movie Industry is L'ingOL all the way to the bank.

Heck, some folks are even going to see it twice! Gotta give credit to Michael Moore, love him, hate him...he's the one making a killing.

Sorry comp. I know that must be rough. Things can still work out though. Not extremely similiar, but a little still: I was adopted, met my bio-mom when I was 18. It's been 4 years. It's not a mother-son relationship, but it is a close friendship. Your situation involves a whole lot more negative emotions unfortunately. But you can hear it from me that you & your son can have a lasting friendship.

He certainly is making a killing. I'd do it if I could. As I said above, I hate the guy, but I am glad he is around. Regardless of his credibility or his methods or anything else, he will have to be a part of getting Bush out of office.

I hope so sherm.

agreed pepe. I do not like Moore as well but not because of his views, it's because of his arrogance. I probably hate arrogance as much as I hate lying even if I agree with the person. but one thing can be said, he's got both sides talking about the issue and that has to be good

Michael Moore makes a film with a "negative slant towards the president?"

Are you people living in a bubble? Whatever it is that some of you people are smoking PLEASE send me some!

You don't have to go very far to realize that the Bush presidency is a flop.

What circumstances do you live under to make you think that Bush is a capable or responsible leader?

No matter what techniques Moore uses in his film, the bottom line is that Bush is NOT working in the peoples best interest!

It is all very simple. Look at which nations we give money to by the billions every year. Try to find the reasons why we give them money. Find out how many foreign nations we actually have troops occupying.(more than you think)

Why do people hate us so much? We come into your country and take out your leader(sounds like we are saying hey you are too dumb to lead yourselves) and then we stay to rebuild. What is this? There is NO reason for us to be there. To the Iraqi people who are the terrorists? (US)

Who gave Sadam power and aided him against Iran?

Why don't we go after these other nations harboring terrorists or WMDs? Because some of them could beat us or have support from someone who would beat us.

compmore - I wish you all the best, and truly hope things work out in your familys situation.

Yea i would be pissed off too if you came in and took out my leader who killed and tortured my fellow americans everyday for "dissenting".

The way i see it, their have always been terrorist living in iraq, we call this people, the radicals, but wait, under saddam's regime, did they have any need to act out in rebellion? Hell no, saddam was doing the work for them, and now we take him away and they get all pissy and decide its up to them to keep the innocent murdering up and the mass graves full. Im sorry but a few thousand mis-guided islamo fascist supporters arnt going to change my mind about the war.

When Bush said we were going into Iraq, he never once mentioned a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. The media flat out lied.

"Why don't we go after these other nations harboring terrorists or WMDs?"

Good idea dumbass. You heard him boss, deploy troops to every country with terrorists and WMD's, even though we are spread thin enough in Iraq.

"Because some of them could beat us"

Umm.. good call. I would say that's a pretty good reason not to invade a country. That probably has something to do with why Mexico hasn't taken back the land they lost to us in the Spanish-American war.. because we'd beat them. Go to a Mexican message board and insult them for not trying to take their country back from the U.S.

"...and then we stay to rebuild. What is this? There is NO reason for us to be there."

Where the hell have you heard this? Even people against the war (see: UN) want to rebuild it. That's what happens when the US goes to war. We topple the country, then rebuild it. Do I need to include the disclaimer that I am not pro-Bush? For you, yeah probably.

"Why do people hate us so much? We come into your country and take out your leader"

Ok.. in dictatorships the citizens are not rightly informed. Do grasp this at all? By the way, we took out Hitler in Germany, and they don't seem to mind. But wouldn't you know it.. back when we were doing it, they still fought back! Crazy how that works.

"Who gave Sadam power and aided him against Iran?"

The same people who gave Castro power. Saddam turned on us, so we turned on him.

"To the Iraqi people who are the terrorists? (US)"

First of all.. so? We're planting a democracy in the middle-east aren't we? The second step toward exterminating the bastards that attacked us (the first being finding bin laden, which Bush forgot about for some reason). Secondly, you've probably been watching a little too much tv or listening to your middle-school teachers a little too closely. It's insane to generalize that on all Iraqis. There are plenty that do realize the scope of what we are doing, and they love us for it.

"It is all very simple."

No it isn't.

Can I ask you a question? Did you get more upset about seeing a leash put on one of the several living Iraqi POW's than you did about the recorded beheading of an American citizen? Did you even see the video? Watch it.

I remember seeing just a few weeks ago in an article when the terrorist struck back at the US by murdering more of their own people. One of the victims in the hospital was quoted saying that he believes that it was the US who was behind the car bombings because, "Iraqi's would never harm other Iraqi's"

Just shows some of the enforced ignorance that fuels their hatred for us.

Code is right, if you haven't seen the film kindly shut the fuck up.

If you don't want to support Moore, fine, get it free here:

http://www.torrentreactor.net/torrents/view_14365

I don't think he'd mind.

Codewarrior,

I am most interested in this quote, "And then, we see what he (Bush) was doing while people were jumping to their death from the twin towers. We see what he was doing while around 3000 American citizens were living their last few seconds on earth. When he had an aide come in and tell him "America is under attack"...he sat in a classroom of young kids, for a "photo op", reading "My pet goat", and looking around like a clueless doofus!"

You said that. You also said that people ought to concede that the reason people are dieing in Iraq is because of President Bush.

Now, if by, "people are dieing in Iraq because of President Bush" we simply mean that "as a matter of fact, President Bush was the President at the time when war was declared on Saddam and his insurgents, and that in war people die," then we do well to point out that seeing the film is not a necessary condition for conceding that "the reason people are dieing is because of Bush." In other words, knowing this piece of information is not dependent on whether or not someone sees the film. And, as a matter of fact, I suspect that Moore intends with his film something beyond that of simply informing us that President Bush happened to be the President at the time that war was declared on Saddam and his insurgents, and that in war people die. It is evident that Moore intends to show that President Bush ought not to have declared war on Saddam and his insurgents. I will not argue against that position with this initial post. Rather, I just wanted to begin by pointing out one thing.

It is this. It seems a bit inconsistent for a person to claim that President Bush ought not to have declared war, but at the same time complain that he did "nothing" in the 5 minutes (or 25, depending on whether you believe the claims of liberal or conservative "sources") after he heard that the planes were flown into the buildings. Perhaps the inconsistency is not immediately evident. Allow me to elaborate.

What ought President Bush to have done, and what ought he to have done immediately upon hearing that the planes were flown into the building? The complaint is that he failed to act immediately. But suppose he did act immediately, what ought he to have done? One wonders what people would say in response to this. One wonders what those people who make the complaint would say in response to this question. I think President Bush has acted in response to the planes being flown into the building, and one way he has acted is to order Saddam removed, and Iraq liberated further from the insurgents. Even those who think this was the wrong action, concede that this is an action that President Bush has taken. Suppose President Bush gave the order for these things to be done immediately upon hearing that the planes were flown into the buildings. Would this have been preferred over what actually happened? The inconsistency in the pointing out of President Bush’s “inaction” after hearing that planes had been flown into the buildings, lies in the fact that the complaint is made by those who think the action that was taken (although not immediately) should not have been taken.

Now, perhaps the person who makes such a complaint would argue that he is not, in making the complaint, arguing that Bush ought not to have ordered the removal of Saddam and the liberation of the Iraqi people from a cruel regime, but rather that we would never have got to this point of being in the position of removing Saddam and liberating the Iraqi people from a cruel regime, had President Bush not been x, where x stands for any number of things (such as, born, stupid, evil, a republican, a conservative, a Christian, an oil tycoon, rich, white, a Mason, a friend to the bin Laden family, etc.), in which case, the burden of proof then falls onto the person making the claim that President Bush is in fact x, and that his being x, Saddam came to power and installed a cruel regime. This is no small task. Indeed, the person would have to show that President Bush’s being x makes President Bush responsible for a complex series of events and actions by several people, groups, and governments.

In the case of Michael Moore, it seems that the claims he makes in his film puts him in the position of having to show that President Bush’s being x makes President Bush responsible not only for Saddam coming to power and installing a cruel regime, but also for Osama bin Laden’s coming to power and helping orchestrate several attacks on the United States and other countries and individuals, including the attacks on the Twin Towers.

I don’t know that I can emphasize enough, and I know that I cannot in brief explain the depth of the burden of proof that is necessary here, in order for someone to successfully prove such a case.

If anyone is interested in discussing this in a different setting, come to a philosophy forum with me: http://speakingrationally.com/viewtopic.php?p=3179

i wish i could get this kind of reaction for our band....

TheSherminator: "Well, it does get old hearing that Bush has ties with Bin Laden AND with Nazis. I have to laugh when I read that stuff. It's so looney. It could go in a comic strip, but instead it becomes a topic of serious discussion somehow."

Except that both are true... But ignorant people usually laugh at things they can't, or refuse to, understand.

I'm taking CodeWarrior's route and leaving this site... I'm still going to actively boycott the RIAA, but this site has gone to shambles.

Code, good review. I saw the movie last night, along with my roomate from Ethiopia, someone who's seen firsthand the terrors of war. He and I were both in tears from the horrific images of the war. I could care less what the "left" or "right" say about the validity of this film... When you see what the bombs and bullets do to HUMAN BEINGS, be they US soldiers or Iraqi children, all debate as to how ACCURATE the movie is goes right out the window.

So let's all bicker about whether or not Michael Moore has an agenda... Let's toss around meaningless terms like, "Libral", or "Pro-Bush", or, "Koolaid" (rolling my eyes)... Let's all bask in the freedom we have to argue politics, while people are losing their families overseas...

Humanity, at this point, sickens me... We're more concerned with a nipple being flashed on TV than people's brains getting blown out... Christ, what's wrong with us?!

So forget it...

When Woodward and Bernstein were publishing their articles on Watergate in the Washington Post, they went out on a limb almost weekly. When the reporters contacted White House representatives to confirm or deny their stories, many officials responded with what's referred to in the trade, as "non-denial denials". They'd threaten to sue, they'd insult the reporters, and say that what the reporters asked "real dumbass questions". But they didn't deny the story.

Ben Bradlee, who was in charge of The Post, was asked what a real denial was. His response was: "When they start calling us Godddam liars, we better start circling the wagons".

So here's Moore, stating his opinion in "Fahrenheit" (which I now also have seen), and on the other hand we've got the Bush administration who is campaigning for reelection. Moore's film does indeed hurt Bush's chances. It IS scathing. And various right wing journalists and broadcasters have attempted to discredit Moore by writing about inaccuracies in Moore's reporting of certain facts in the film. Moore has addressed each accusation, and rebutted it on his website, and plans to continue to do so, for as long as it takes.

What's curious to me, is that for all the flak Moore has taken for what he's brought to light in "Fahrenheit", not one representative of the Bush administration... not with all of their resources available, and actual records of what Moore's put in his film on hand... has stepped forward to call Moore a liar. These are the people with the most to gain by proclaiming it, and the most to lose by keeping quiet. So why is there no voice from the administration calling Moore out on his facts? Maybe because they simply can't. I can't believe that The White House would sit passively by, and leave a handful of journalists to the job of discrediting Moore, if it was within their power to do it themselves.

Yes, I saw the film. And I applauded it when it ended, along with everybody else in the theatre. I'm not a Moore disciple, in the sense that I believe he's the only man in our country who's managed to corner the market on wisdom... but he's there for us, standing up for what he believes in... and as was already mentioned in these comments by another user, it's got us thinking and talking about the issues. That's its' true value.

Thanks, Code... for continuing to keep the focus where it counts! Our best to you & yours!

Pianotex asked for real information, and references to verify. I suggest he and others look for this article, which I got from the web, and I hope is still available: "Saddam's WMD Have Been Found," by Kenneth R. Timmerman in Insight on the News. (Also, there is an article by the same author, "Iraqi Weapons in Syria," which I haven't read.) Timmerman's article details exactly what has been found in and out of Iraq and how it directly ties in with Saddam's WMD program. The conclusion is inescapable. Bush was not wrong about WMD, and he didn't "lie to the American people." Only an idiot or one blinded by Bush-hate could make that conclusion.

Chris Hitchens raises an interesting question, "Is Michael Moore as dumb as he appears." Certainly not. Therefore we must view his omissions and distortions as deliberate distortion. Moore is guilty of that which he accuses the President. Which is sort of standard liberal playbook. What sin are you guilty of? Accuse the other side of it.

Find a need and fill it. Yes, give MM his due, Moore has made an industry filling the need of the ~15% of the population who hate Bush to have their hatred validated and echoed in some way. Preaching to the choir can be very profitable. Just as many conservative authors made a great deal of money writing books that play to the substantial number of people who hated Clinton. I'm kind of borderline in that camp, but I didn't buy any of the books.

Someone suggested that Bush was a poor leader. Overall, I must agree with that. Actually, I think he's a good leader, but he's pushed too many programs I don't agree with. The war in Iraq just doesn't happen to be one of them. I am a registered independent. Bashing Bush may make the haters feel good, but it doesn't provide me with an alternative I can vote for. On another thread someone called Kerry a communist. Of course this is hyperbole, but it is nearer the truth than most would want to admit. Even if I concede Bush is a problem, Kerry is not the solution. He'd be a bigger problem.

Whatever excuses Moore makes on his website, he cannot erase the stubborn facts he left out of his movie. Iraq was our enemy. Iraq was a funder of terrorism, a coddler of terrorists, besides being a terrorist state itself. Saddam was evil personified. One can argue whether or not Iraq should have been number two on the hit list after Afghanistan, but there is no argument that it had to be dealt with. Even Clinton and former Clinton administration do not deny the need to deal with Iraq. We have Gore on tape talking about "regime change." How did he propose to accomplish this? Send Inspector Blix in with a pointed stick? Senator Clinton and Senator Kerry voted to authorize action against Saddam. Sane, rational people simply cannot subscribe to the view that Mr. Moore wants to promote.

I know what Code is doing by bringing up these subjects, and I know why he's doing it. It would be my preference for the site to refrain from feeding the hate. It would be my preference for the site to stick to the topic of its site name. However, I believe in free speech and free press, and whomever owns and operates this site can allow what they want. Thankfully, they let everyone have their say. One can't really ask more than that. I defend Moore's right to say whatever nonsense he pleases, and there's no reason Code can't comment on it.

My god. Satire is dead. Sarcasm is dead. Next, you will be criticing MadTV for inaccuracies and not being Fair and Balanced.

Stop Talking. Google "Gulliver's Travels". Jeesh!

I am thinking about restricting this site to Literature or History or Philosophy students or professors (and paid subscribers, of course.)

Can't you all take a joke without an emoticon? The internet has dumbed you all down. Second vast wasteland made out of an oasis I've seen in my lifetime. Google that!


Ps: And kudos to the dude or dudette who congratulates Codewarrior for leaving this site RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEWSARTICLE POSTED BY CODEWARRIOR. Unless that was Sarcasm. I couldn't tell. There wasn't an emoticon. Anyway, you get the philistine of the month award.

I didn't want to expose Code Warrior's deep cover, but this chatter "INDUCES" me. Code's recent move to the greater Waco Area inspired me to get him a job at Bob Jones University. He is an undercover FBI mole and will report back on the KKK and Skull and Bones Society. Be patient.

When someone asked the fellow cleaning up the GOP elephant flop at the circus, "Why don't you go back to graduate school so you can get a better job?" The guy said, "What?!!! And quit show business?"

I think Moore is Funny as shit. That means Funny as Hell. or Very Funny. I just realized that the world is run by computer nerds, and not one of them has ever written a sacastic computer program. Is that possible? Are we headed towards a future dominated by LITERALMAN! Thats my new cartoon character. LITERALMAN VISITS THE MOVIES. LITTERALMAN GOES ON A CYBERDATE. LITERALMAN WATCHES A REALITY TV PROGRAM. LITERALMAN GOES TO IRAQ.

HaHa.

(back to ee cummings mode. barger. where are you?

I am proud of the fact that I didn't use an emoticon.

I hate it when people try to put words in my mouth that were never there.

symonx said:"You also said that people ought to concede that the reason people are dieing in Iraq is because of President Bush."

See, I knew I didn't say those words because unlike symonx, I know how to spell dying, and it is NOT "dieing". For those who don't believe me, do a FIND on the page and see where the word "dieing" appears...first time in symonx' post.

I stand completely behind everything I said, and NOT behind those things people want to attribute to me, which I did NOT say.

And, as a postscript, I am watching the TODAY program this morning...it's funny, like me, they keep calling it a documentary, and are saying it is breaking records.

Hmmm...funny thing about the truth...it seems to not go away.

http://www.bigempire.com/filthy/ - Another review of the movie.

Every time I see an article like this, I am reminded more and more of Rense.com.

And, if those who have NOT seen the film, actually go to see what they are talking about, they will see that, while people were leaping to their deaths, Bush was doing exactly what I said. He was sitting there looking like a confused doofus in a classroom of kids reading "My Pet Goat".

I know there are lots of 1984 things going on...but, the actual 9 minutes of video footage of him doing that, is very clear and factual. Hard to argue with what actually happened.

Everyone responds with "I hate that fat bastard Moore." If that's the only thing you can come up with, personal attacks, then I have to question why your only information comes from watching TV every night.

Hey, I don't tell you to go out and pay your $7.50 to attend the film. But how could you have not read the dozen books that came out the last 18 months? You don't have to debate by quibbling the facts in the documentary. I've read all the books, and Moore's film skims over the surface of many topics. I can imagine follow-on films that explore hours of investigations.

The LA times reported last week that some 25 films are being rushed out by indie film makers. Watching the TV coverage this week, the network pundits are all attacking Moore. It is significant that the ONLY PERSON defending Moore is Hilary Rosen on Carson Tucker's show. She has resurfaced as a media consultant (whatever that is) for MSNBC.

The big media outlets have refused all year to show images of the huge outpourings in the streets in the rush to war. One thing (even I didn't know) was that the 10,000 people at the Inaugural pelted Bush's limousine with eggs. The Moore film showed the footage of his limo speeding up. He is the first president in history who didn't do the walk up the steps. And this was in the first days of his administration! Even before he went to war. This is something TV didn't show.

I appreciate the traffic that Code's film review has generated at Dmusic. Let's take it up a notch, and stop with the cliches: "Bush haters" and "that fat slob."

If you have done some investigation this year and care to dispute the disturbing allegations that all the books have raised, let's discuss them.

If you need a list of recommended reading, I'll provide it.

I'll throw my two cents in with this:

MSNBC has a video link on their site that shows a story run on NBC. The segment is called the "Truth Squad" and it tried to counter Michael Moore's documentary.

First example: They say that Moore "ambushes" politicians. Why is it an ambush to walk up to a representative of the people? And they counter with representative Kennedy talking about his nephew. Well, Moore didn't ask about nephews. He asked about children. And to my knowledge less than a handful of Congressman have children enlisted.

Secondly, they try to dispute the Bush/Bin Laden connection by offering a fluff opinion sound byte from Roger Cressey who says "it's just not true." Again, where are the facts? Why didn't NBC discuss the Bin Laden investments in Bush Jr.'s failed oil company attempts in the late 70's?

Thirdly, they try to dispute the planes that carried Bin Laden family members out of the country in the days after 9/11. They say alleged flights and then quote the FBI as saying they let go those who they felt didn't need any more questioning But NBC failed, yet again, to follow up with hard pressing questions.

The point of this is: If Moore is so inaccurate, why then, does even the media throw out opinion responses, with no hard facts to back up the case against his film? I can offer hard, documented proof to refute the story they ran. And if I can, and the national media can't, or won't, what does that say about the media? To me, it screams "mouthpiece for the politicians."

Now for my soapbox:
There has been no proof offered as to a direct link between the 9/11 attacks and Iraq. And to use the argument of him being a dictator, while we coddle China, North Korea, and others, is hypocritical.

We went in to Iraq for oil money, plain and simple. And if Halliburton, Dick Cheney, and the Project for a New American Century don't offer proof, then you are living with blinders on.

I don't want to push any buttons. Personally I am tired of the bickering. But I can't just listen to people defend the actions of this administration. Not when my Constitutional freedoms are being stripped on a weekly basis (including my rights to make personal copies of music).

I hate Bush, Kerry, and almost all other politicians today. They are nothing more than talking heads, designed to feed us bogus information, offering us more government money if we just keep electing them. Meanwhile, we get rights taken away, and the government gets bigger.

And finally:
Code, I happen to like your posts. I also happen to like people's rebuttals. If only because that's the beauty of our country--"I may not agree with you, but I would defend to the death your right to say it." Why people feel the need to take personal pot shots is beyond my comprehension. I don't agree with a lot of people here, but I love to read your posts, and at least try to understand your views. Why is that so hard to do--to the point that it drives some away?

It's a shame. Because we bicker amongst ourselves, those in office keep us fighting each other, rather than the real enemy.... them.

God bless you all.

Never too late to revisit a beautiful classic. Click here to see Ashcroft warble "let the Eagle Soar."

http://files.dmusic.com/video/ashcroft.mov

I hate corporations.

leflaw
Dmusic LLC.

here's the trailer folks.
http://files.dmusic.com/video/fahrenheit_911.mov



Here's Colin Powell on Ted Kopple when his assistant made a unilateral move on the caemra. That's amusing, if this was any other movie crew that I ever saw, the union boss would break your hand if you touched the camera, a cable, a lamp or even a potted plant.

http://files.dmusic.com/video/powell.mov

Code...
Keep on doing what you do best. Excercise your freedom of speech to the fullest. Good post!

Woof said: "When Woodward and Bernstein were publishing their articles on Watergate in the Washington Post, they went out on a limb almost weekly. When the reporters contacted White House representatives to confirm or deny their stories, many officials responded with what's referred to in the trade, as "non-denial denials". They'd threaten to sue, they'd insult the reporters, and say that what the reporters asked "real dumbass questions". But they didn't deny the story."
I have not seen the movie yet. I've heard so many Republican pollsters (like Kelly Ann) refer to the skillful editing that Moore employs, his known anti-Bush stance, that it is NOT a real documentary - but a political commercial against BUSH and perhaps it violates the McCain-Feingold law. So many of them bash Moore, but I haven't heard them say that Moore is a liar.

"When Bush said we were going into Iraq, he never once mentioned a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. The media flat out lied."

Are you insane? Bush and crew repeatedly linked Iraq with 9/11 and therefore with Al Queda. Read a newspaper. I beg you.

Tom, thanks for those links - especially the Tim Russert/Powell interview. I can't believe that I missed that!
Code, it's already been said, but thanks for your posts and personal review of Moore's movie.

"Except that both are true... But ignorant people usually laugh at things they can't, or refuse to, understand."

What's your point? People with a clue also laugh at people without a clue all the time. There goes your argument down the drain. Good one, dumbass. I'm convinced!



"Read a newspaper"

No no. I said the media lied. Why don't you watch a tape of his speech, find a transcript or something. He said Saddam's regime can not be tolerated.

I have not seen the movie yet. If it is a documentary or semi documentary or what ever. He would need to make his film in twenty parts. Mr. Moore JOB is to get you informed. Now people dig up the truth. Do not spill party propaganda. Code Thanks.
Independent I make up my own mind.

"Mr. Moore JOB is to get you informed."

No it isn't. His job is to open your eyes to his point of view. Which would be fine if people didn't think he was the truth police.

"No no. I said the media lied. Why don't you watch a tape of his speech, find a transcript or something. He said Saddam's regime can not be tolerated."

What speech in particular are you talking about? Bush and crew made a million statements linking Iraq to 9/11 and therefore linking Iraq to Al Queda. Here's one for you:

His Iraq war resolution to Congress and his letter to Congress of March 2003 both said:

"acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

His war resolution specifically linked Iraq to 9/11! I could find a hundred more if I felt like it. To say that Bush "never once mentioned a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. The media flat out lied." is downright ludicrous.

Btw Sherminator, I guess you don't follow the news but the bipartisan 9/11 Commission recently found that there was no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and Al Queda and the Bush Administration has been trying to counter that claim. You can read a little bit about it here:

"The Iraq Connection
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

His speech.

and then I hit post before I type anything more than that. oops.

I follow the news. I heard there was no "collaborative relationship."

One final point regarding this quote from the article:

"In late 2001, Cheney said it was "pretty well confirmed" that Sept. 11 mastermind Mohamed Atta met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official before the attacks, in April 2000 in Prague; Cheney later said the meeting could not be proved or disproved."

Last week Cheney was on TV and was challenged regarding his "pretty well confirmed" comment. Cheney said "I never said that." They have him on tape saying it and he lied right in the face of the reporter. It was amazing.

Don't forget this one:

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda""
-G.W.

"His speech."

I'm not sure which speech you are referring to, but just because Bush did not make a link in one speech doesn't mean he didn't make a link. There's a reason that something like 70 percent of Americans think there is a link between Iraq and Al Queda. It's because the Bush propaganda machine told them so.

"Don't forget this one:"

I know that one. Such brilliant reasoning. The mind boggles.

"I'm not sure which speech you are referring to, but just because Bush did not make a link in one speech doesn't mean he didn't make a link."

haha, I know. I wish I could find it right now. It wasn't any random speech.

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." I wanted to throw that in there. Sorry.

And where did he lie ? Or is it just half truths he is telling ? Do you think Mr. Bush is telling the truth when we went to war. From what I read I think not. As for the terrorist attacks going on in Iraq. It is the the Saddam's party that is doing it.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda""
Your right they hated each other. Where do you think Saddam was going to next in the 90's (Saudi Arabia). Do you think Al Queda did not know that.

All documentaries have a "point of view." It simply is not the case that all documentaries are unbiased except for those that we don't like, which we then see as magically "biased," and refuse to call them documentaries. - Roger Ebert
Even if you do not agree with what Moore says, you would be foolish not to listen to some of the information, the more you know the better the choices you can make.

Michael Moore had made a comment to the effect that he made the movie with 1 purprose in mind: to get George Bush elected out of office.

Not to say that GW didn't make mistakes, but the views of this film are obviously biased based on the above comment.

Well guys, i do apologize for cussing. i was rather grumpy, and also intolerant...also, i do have the freedom to "X", but i agree with this site's articles and MOST opinions, so i choose not to use it. anyway, GL code and do post once in awhile.

"I hate corporations.

leflaw
Dmusic LLC."

Leflaw, you're the best. I love that stuff. I hope other people are listening to what you're saying on this thread.

On the other hand, Moore puts his sarcasm under the guise of "documentary" .. yet and Oliver Stone movie cannot be considered a documentary when, in some cases, perhaps they are closer to the definition. hehehe Check this out for an examination of Moore's "Bowling" http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

Also, Code, you're right that the common way to spell dieing is dying. However, many people spell it the way I did, and you can find it in the dictionary, so to speak, here: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dieing

Any way, you DID say that after seeing the movie we ought to concede that Bush is the reason people are dieing. You said it here: "Then, her own son, is killed. She reads the last letter she receives from him. It is a very anti-Bush letter. She does a 180 during the course of the film. She goes to Washington, to the White House, and says that now, she knows where to put the blame for her son's meaningless death. She doesn't blame Saddam or BinLaden, she blames Bush, and with all we have seen in the film, we must agree." And, you said it implicitly when you mention the horrors of war, the dead and wounded.

At any rate, I shouldn't be surprised that no one has really responded to my post.. even though I didn't really take an anti-Moore position, or argue that the film is full of lies or anything like that. I simply pointed out what would be necessary in order for Moore to rightly and "really" accomplish what he seems to have claimed to. [And lef, I know you will say that what he wanted to accomplish wasn't to prove that Bush is x and his being x makes him responsible for -insert fact here- (such as, our being in the position to remove Saddam and liberate a people from a hostile regime ), that instead it was to be sarcastic and make millions of dollars, which he DID accomplish, and to influence an election such that President Bush will not be the President next time, which he MAY accomplish. However, you have to admit, as evidenced by some of the responses on this thread, that he ended up accomplishing "wrongly" (or not "really") that first thing, except he did so WITHOUT actually proving that Bush is x and that his being x makes him responsible for -insert fact here-.]

mroop, as I recall, President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address clearly made a link between Al Queda and Saddam.

yo simon,

My point on sarcasm and satire is that it has always been an effective political and rhetorical tool, but when you have the extremes masquerading as centrists, its tough to expose.

How do you do a satire on the Fox Network, for example, when it is its own satire?

anyhoo, good to see you carousing with us sophists over here.

ok... you think moore is bad/good depending on opinion? You *really* need to see British television.

I present an exellent satire:
http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/special_reports/iraq_hard_place.html

DISCLAIMER: yes its liberal biased, as the authors of the program claim, *BUT* I would wager money not one fact of this programme is wrong. Channel 4 is a public service broadcaster (like BBC but funded by ads not tax) - if they got it wrong they would be taken off air or fined.

Whatever you think about Moore, it must be hard to deny or ignore this - its powerful.

Satire? Sarcasm? How about just good old slander? It's as American as apple pie. Thomas Jefferson was inciting pampheteers and anonymous columnists to slander Hamilton and President John Adams from the beginning of the Republic.

That doesn't make it any less despicable.

mroop, you read, but apparently not widely.

Since Saddam harbored persons involved in the first attack on the Trade Center, wouldn't it be reasonable to suspect he would have some little involvement in the second attack. Chief instigator and pilot-who-never-learned-to-land Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi Intelligence Service in Prague, as many as four times, and funding from Iraqi intelligence was requested -- according to Czech counterintelligence.

No, there is no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. No suspicion. See no evil, hear no evil, think no evil. Except as it involves Bush.

I kinda wish the crackpots would leave this site.

I've just got to see this great film again!
Still Pickin'
Bill Hudson

im kind of tired from reading all of this and i thought carla had said crackpipes instead of crackpots... lol

"mroop, you read, but apparently not widely."

Please. I read all sides, not just the right wing tinfoil hat crackpot sites that you read. The Prague meeting is highly disputed and has been denied by Rumsfeld and others. Maybe you should listen to President Bush, who has said there is no Iraq - Al Queda link. LOL

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks."

Get a clue, autodidact, and stay off those tinfoil hat sites that you are always citing!

Btw autodidact, did you not see that I cited Cheney's backpeddling and lying regarding Atta and Prague? Are you aware that Cheney just got caught lying about it last week? You can read about it here:

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=pretty+well+confirmed&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=images

So in conclusion, please don't tell me I don't read widely. It is you that only reads extreme right wing tinfoil hat web sites and believes every word you read. : )

tinfoil hat .. did you see that movie with Mel Gibson where the kids were wearing tin foil hats to protect them from the aliens...