Fahrenheit/911 - Your Thoughts...

This thread could cause some controversy but have any of you seen this movie & if so what are your thoughts???..

It has changed the way I think. It made me laugh, cry a little, but mostly I was mad throughout it. I walked out feeling hollow inside. To everyone reading this, whether your republican, democrate, a Bush hater or lover, or Michael Moore hater or lover you must see this movie. And when you do, watch it with an open mind. I’ve read a lot of feed back where many people would refuse to believe the issues in this movie, but these were mainly from sheep following people who believe everything they’re told by the news and the government.

By the way, from an entertaining stand point, the movie was very good.

Thoughts???..

Saw some of it, but after watching other documentaries that he made and then F 9/11 I respected the content more in his most recent project.

Usually, he presents things the way he wants people to see it, whereas, this latest project he lets the film do the talking. Much respect. Not a bad flick, but not very political myself.

Vito

Your website URL isn’t working, just thought you’d like to know. Perhaps you should host it with us? We do hosting for fun and profit.

Can you really believe in a “documentary” (if you want to call if that) that is extremely biased and purposely deceives people? I take the movie with a grain of salt. I would look a lot more into the 9/11 Commission Report instead of a movie full of deceit and out right lies.

I would take the COMMISSION report with a grain of salt!!
What does michael moore have to lose? He has no political career and his films were never intended to please and placate the mainstream audience.

The commission on the other hand… if you want to talk about purposeful deception!! Not to mention the deception of Bush himself (or should I say Cheney and Bush Sr. since George W. is dumb as rocks)

I am willing to keep an open mind to BOTH sides regarding the film, but there is plenty of incriminating stuff in there that can’t be ignored or written off as skewed by bias. Bare facts do still exist, deep down.

Bet you can’t tell which side of the political fence I am on :cool:

For people who actually like to think, instead of be led like sheep by propagandists, here is a view of Michael Moore from the far left where he is most comfortable. Lest you think that Hitchens only scathingly reviews his own kind, please read Hitchens views of Ronald Reagan.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Michael Moore is a propagandist who tries (and is successful) in make millions of dollars. The commission is bipartisan, so they is little, if any, party lines drawn on issues. I cannot honestly believe you haven’t read some of the deceptions Michael Moore has in his movie. I mean, he claims some rediculous percentage as Bush’s vacation time, yet neglects to mention he includes weekends and Camp David visits (which makes up almost all of the time) as vacations. I would hardly call a Camp David visit as a weekend. Kras, I’ve read some of your posts around here, surely you are not so easily deceived.

Michael Moore is clearly bias and I’ve heard him in interviews admitting that he is…

Nevertheless, current Pres. Bush is so dim witted that he doesn’t need much help putting his foot in his mouth.

After the bombing of 9/11 we had the support of the world in really doing something about terrorism and we started doing good in Afghanistan. But now, three years later, the Bush Administration happened to make decisions that have turned our USA into some malign evil Empire. Trust me, Michael Moore isn’t the problem here!

Please name me some things that the President has done that were his fault and clearly dim witted…
He was given the same intelligence as Congress and the war was approved by them, so you cannot really say that. The new report from the 9/11 commission debunks almost all of what Clark had said about Bush wanting “false evidence.” Most of our “allies” that are against us in the war have alterior motives. Look at France, Russia, and Germany. All against the war and later found to be part of a giant Oil For Food scandle which fed millions of dollars to them from Saddam himself.

Name calling and questioning a persons intelligence who is obviously intelligent is the refuge of the weak of mind.

Lack of eloquence as an orator does not equal lack of intelligence, nor does great oration skills equal intelligence.

While you might say that dad’s money bought Bush’s way into Yale -you might also say the same of Kerry by the way, altough I would not say that about either man- or you might say that Bush’s dad bought him a Harvard MBA, you certainly cannot say that daddy bought his way through flight school and fighter pilot training.

Becoming a military fighter pilot is very difficult and requires a high level of intelligence. Money does not differentiate you from the rest of the class in military flight school.

You either have what it takes to make it or you don’t. Maybe an analogy to the theme of this board is appropriate here. Second place is first loser in any race. There is no second place in fighter school. You make it or you lose.

Calling the man dim witted shows both ignorance and lack of knowlege of the facts on the part of the name caller.

Stop parroting what you read in the media and hear on T.V. Perhaps you will then be able to gain some perspective.

Certainly I’m not easily deceived, but that doesn’t mean that I have to trust Bush! (or michael moore, for that matter)

However, I am counting down the days until I go to school not because Im excited to leave home, but because I’ll be provided with health insurance. It’s little things like that which have me set against the administration… you know, just little things like being able to go to the doctor. I have a part-time high school job and I use my paycheck to pay medical bills. Perhaps we could slow up the oil craze and the goddamned war-mongering, I am sick of the debaucle that is Iraq and i have no faith whatsoever left over for george bush and his fun times at the cowboy ranch while kids my age are dying. and for what?! saddam? weapons of mass destruction? give me a break.

Greatest number of casualties since Vietnam, that speaks for itself. I would appreciate hearing what is being accomplished at this point…? That’s right, I thought i heard silence!

I may be oversimplifying, but I will not be on the same side of an argument with george W. EVER, as a matter of principle.

And while I accept what you’ve said, with all due respect I don’t think Bush’s alleged vacation time was meant to be the highlight of the film.

Who here thinks Bush will get re-elected? I vote, NOT! and I’m not American, nor political.

Well to ease the tension concerning the two presidential candidates, why doesnt everyone take a break and watch a REAL documentary here at www.jibjab.com

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4198390-103632,00.html

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=122&row=1

Place ur bets

Okay, so you think that the government is responsible for socialized medicine?

Most deaths since Vietnam? Well considering there haven’t been any major conflicts since then (except Gulf War 1), I would sure hope not! The deaths in this war are nowhere near the numbers in Vietnam. In Vietnam, hundreds were dying a day, here, we might have 2 or 3 deaths in a day, if that.

I know his vacation time was not the highlight of the film, I am just bringing up one of Moore’s many misleadings.

For starts, a person that speaks english as a first language that can’t pronounce simple words like N-U-C-L-E-A-R does not reflect intelligence.

  1. His ignorance of the basics of history is a pretty clear example of the ways in which his little mind is just not up to the job of President. In February, for example, Bush lectured the Japanese parliament about how the United States and Japan had been allies “for a century and a half”, when in fact, the US and Japan have only been allied since after World War II, which ended just over 50 years ago. You’ll also remember when he was campaigning to be President, Bush had no idea who the President of Pakistan was, even though the military coup in Pakistan had recently been front-page news. Campaigning for President and not bothering to read the newspaper sounds pretty stupid to me.

  2. Well, he got below average grades in college and spent half of his adult life as a drunk. That’s a dumb thing to do, and alcohol kills brain cells, so we know he could have ended up a lot smarter than he is today?! Driving drunk, which he admits to doing and has been convicted for, is definitely a stupid thing to do. Of course, his advisors tried to keep that conviction off the public record, which is also what they do with his public comments and speeches - they censor and edit them after the fact, changing the official transcripts to erase his mistakes! His advisors must think he’s stupid if they have to fix what he says (it’s all documented in the Washington Post - look it up if you can manage it).

  3. He doesn’t even understand how the beliefs of his own church are different from the beliefs of other churches, even though he goes to church every week! In 1994, George W said, “The Episcopal Church is very ritualistic and it has a kind of repetition to the service. It’s the same service, basically, over and over again. Different sermon, of course. The Methodist Church is lower key. We don’t have the kneeling. And I’m sure there is some kind of heavy doctrinal difference as well, which I’m not sophisticated enough to explain to you.” He admits he’s not smart to understand how Methodist theology is different from Episcopal theology, so how can he understand the nuances of U.S. foreign policy?

  4. He apparently is pretty fuzzy-headed about the economy and basic mathematics. Last year, he was insisting that his tax cuts combined with increased spending would ensure the continuation of a budget surplus. To professional economists, that idea seemed to be kind of stupid. They said so, but George W. Bush dismissed their criticism. Now, it turns out that Bush has admitted that he was wrong, and that the United States will have budget deficits for the next decade because of his fuzzy math. In a show of unbelievably bull-headed inanity, George W. Bush is calling for making these damaging tax cuts permanent.

  5. He said he appointed Thomas White to be Secretary of the Army because White had great business experience at Enron. Bush said he wanted Thomas White to run the Army like he ran his business. The problem is, White’s former employees say that he was dishonest and helped to set up fake partnerships that eventually led to Enron’s bankruptcy. White responds that he had no part in the illegal fraud because he wasn’t really in touch with the operations of the division he was supposed to be in charge with. So, either White is either a criminal or grossly incompetent. When George W. Bush appointed this man to run the United States Army, it was a very stupid thing to do.

  6. He has no understanding of basic scientific concepts, and even worse, he makes up science in order to support his own policies. He has stated that he believes that creationism has equal scientific validity as the theories of biological evolution through natural selection. He doesn’t understand the basic science of global warming, genetic engineering, stem cell research, cloning, abstinence education, contraception and missile shield research. Time and time again, he’s gotten the science wrong on these issues, even though the correct information was readily available.

These were examples of George W. Bush’s stupidity, ignorance and intellectual laziness.

Yeah!! Anyone who thinks Bush is dim witted lacks intelligence…WHATEVER. Try pulling your head out your arse!! Not only is that comment inaccurate, but its the same tactic the Bush Administration uses to intimidate and challenge anyone who questions Bush intelligence. Save it …cause it’s a meaningless phrase serving no real purpose.

You claim that I am parroting what I read in the media. But, where do you get your news? Do you not bother to read the newspaper like your hero Bush?? Do you and your man Bush look instead to divine intervention to make decisions like other fundamentalist? Instead of using the brain that you were given to make intelligent decisions. Which in the case of Bush may be a misnomer.

Btw, for response why Bush IS dimwitted, look at my above list…

I totally agree. Fact Bush and his father have the lowest IQ of modern us presidents Clinton has the highest.

Where do you get this “fact?”

JMHO, I could be wrong:

  • Michael Moore is a demagogue. His work exists only to create controversy in an attempt to show impropiety. That being said, I do not neccesarily discount his information, nor his right to voice it, but take serious offense to the manner in which he feels compelled to voice that opinion.

  • Neither Farenheit 9/11 nor the 9/11 commision (I’ve read the enitre thing, and watched the movie) do what’s needed. This isn’t a court case. We don’t have to assign liability for 9/11. They (FBI, CIA, NSA, DOD, Pres. Bush, Congress, big money and the voting public) all were at fault on some degree. It’d be nice if we could say “This is what went wrong, let’s make sure it doesn’t happen again.” But we can’t.

  • What’s needed to overhaul our now obselote intelligence agencies and defense? This is the real question. All the rest of this are arguements for or against a candidate.

FWIW, I’m a democrat.

  • End of Discussion for me. unless someone wants to vetnure a guess on my charge?

QUOTE=scarface]For starts, a person that speaks english as a first language that can’t pronounce simple words like N-U-C-L-E-A-R does not reflect intelligence.

Stephen Hawking has a speech impediment. He can’t speak his native language at all. He seems to do physics quite well though. Are you saying there is some correlation between the ability to speak well and intelligence? Are all deaf people who are deaf also unintelligent? Are all people who may have a degree of speech impediment also unintelligent? Probably better rethink that point. :o

  1. His ignorance of the basics of history is a pretty clear example of the ways in which his little mind is just not up to the job of President. In February, for example, Bush lectured the Japanese parliament about how the United States and Japan had been allies “for a century and a half”, when in fact, the US and Japan have only been allied since after World War II, which ended just over 50 years ago. You’ll also remember when he was campaigning to be President, Bush had no idea who the President of Pakistan was, even though the military coup in Pakistan had recently been front-page news. Campaigning for President and not bothering to read the newspaper sounds pretty stupid to me.

I would check your historical facts on this also. Perhaps a reading of U.S.-Japanese history as a whole, not just post WWII would be in order. Also, read why Kerry had not, over a several month time period, had a security breifing done. Campaining for President and not being breifed on the nuclear threat from North Korea, events in Syria Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Chechnyia, Russia, Bosnia ad infinitum “sounds pretty stupid to me.” No, I change my mind. I know the nature of political campaigns and how busy the candidate is. I am willing to give Kerry the benefit of the doubt over his “stupidity,” instead of parrotting what someone says in the newspaper. :slight_smile:

  1. Well, he got below average grades in college and spent half of his adult life as a drunk. That’s a dumb thing to do, and alcohol kills brain cells, so we know he could have ended up a lot smarter than he is today?! Driving drunk, which he admits to doing and has been convicted for, is definitely a stupid thing to do. Of course, his advisors tried to keep that conviction off the public record, which is also what they do with his public comments and speeches - they censor and edit them after the fact, changing the official transcripts to erase his mistakes! His advisors must think he’s stupid if they have to fix what he says (it’s all documented in the Washington Post - look it up if you can manage it).

[i]Presidents have advisors who edit, clarify,revise and extend text and spoken remarks all the time. That fact is not unique to just this President, it is a fact of the modern presidency for ALL Presidents. By the way, I think I can manage to look up the article to which you refer. In fact, I can guarentee that I have access to much more information than you will ever have in your lifetime. Thank you for the comment though.

I agree, drunk driving is a stupid thing to do. Yet many people do it. Need I point out Chappaquidik sp? to you, and the fact that Ted Kennedy killed a women then used his father’s influence to buy his way out of trouble?
I also think amphetamine use and abuse is a stupid thing to do,i.e., JFK during his administration. I guess if you want to go down this line of argument then we can disqualify a number of presidents and politicians from both parties and a huge number of potential candidates. [/i]

  1. He doesn’t even understand how the beliefs of his own church are different from the beliefs of other churches, even though he goes to church every week! In 1994, George W said, “The Episcopal Church is very ritualistic and it has a kind of repetition to the service. It’s the same service, basically, over and over again. Different sermon, of course. The Methodist Church is lower key. We don’t have the kneeling. And I’m sure there is some kind of heavy doctrinal difference as well, which I’m not sophisticated enough to explain to you.” He admits he’s not smart to understand how Methodist theology is different from Episcopal theology, so how can he understand the nuances of U.S. foreign policy?

I really see no relationship between knowledge of the differences between the theology of certain churches and U.S. Foriegn policy. This line of reasoning is as absurd as saying because a person has not studied physics, for example, he must also be poor at philosophy or the humanities.

  1. He apparently is pretty fuzzy-headed about the economy and basic mathematics. Last year, he was insisting that his tax cuts combined with increased spending would ensure the continuation of a budget surplus. To professional economists, that idea seemed to be kind of stupid. They said so, but George W. Bush dismissed their criticism. Now, it turns out that Bush has admitted that he was wrong, and that the United States will have budget deficits for the next decade because of his fuzzy math. In a show of unbelievably bull-headed inanity, George W. Bush is calling for making these damaging tax cuts permanent.

You of course are referring to the Economist, Paul Krugman, a leading critic of President Bush. Find me any two economists who agree on any subject and you are doing well. I will give you Milton Friedman’s critique of Rubinomics for a starting point.

  1. He said he appointed Thomas White to be Secretary of the Army because White had great business experience at Enron. Bush said he wanted Thomas White to run the Army like he ran his business. The problem is, White’s former employees say that he was dishonest and helped to set up fake partnerships that eventually led to Enron’s bankruptcy. White responds that he had no part in the illegal fraud because he wasn’t really in touch with the operations of the division he was supposed to be in charge with. So, either White is either a criminal or grossly incompetent. When George W. Bush appointed this man to run the United States Army, it was a very stupid thing to do.

[i]Agreed It is stupid to appoint people who are not up to the job to positions that they should not be in. This is the same as saying that any President or candidate MUST be fully aware of the faults of all those he or she appoints, which essentially means you must know everything about their history, as well as what they might do in the future.

Hmmmm, I guess you must call Kerry’s using Sandy Berger as an advisor “a very stupid thing to do.” Dang it, he should have known in ADVANCE that Berger was under criminal investigation and had been the subject of two search warrants. Berger is either grossly incompetent or a criminal. I won’t jump to conclusions though. Unlike you, I will wait to see what the investigation and trial produces before I say he is a criminal or not a criminal. on the other hand, White has never been charged with any crime that I KNOW of. I will refrain from calling him a criminal until he also is proven to be one. [/i]

  1. He has no understanding of basic scientific concepts, and even worse, he makes up science in order to support his own policies. He has stated that he believes that creationism has equal scientific validity as the theories of biological evolution through natural selection. He doesn’t understand the basic science of global warming, genetic engineering, stem cell research, cloning, abstinence education, contraception and missile shield research. Time and time again, he’s gotten the science wrong on these issues, even though the correct information was readily available.

[i]Time do ante up on your part. Please educate us and PROVE biological evolution vs. creationism to all of us uneducated people out here. While you are at it I want YOU to PROVE that global warming is a fact, show me what you know about genetic engineering, how stem cell research works and what might be cured using stem cell research as well as all of the other subjects you mentioned. Note that I did not say refer me to other sources where you obtained information.

You want the President to know all. I am holding you to the same standard. I will admit up front that I do not know very much about those subjects, as I am not a geneticist, don’t know atmospheric science etcetera.[/i]

These were examples of George W. Bush’s stupidity, ignorance and intellectual laziness.

I will refrain from commenting on your intelligence because I think denigrating another persons intelligence because they happen to disagree with you is a waste of time

Yeah!! Anyone who thinks Bush is dim witted lacks intelligence…WHATEVER. Try pulling your head out your arse!! Not only is that comment inaccurate, but its the same tactic the Bush Administration uses to intimidate and challenge anyone who questions Bush intelligence. Save it …cause it’s a meaningless phrase serving no real purpose.

Perhaps you need to read what I wrote again. I did not say you were not intelligent. I said you were ignorant of the facts. Does the word dictionary mean anything to you?

You claim that I am parroting what I read in the media. But, where do you get your news? Do you not bother to read the newspaper like your hero Bush?? Do you and your man Bush look instead to divine intervention to make decisions like other fundamentalist? Instead of using the brain that you were given to make intelligent decisions. Which in the case of Bush may be a misnomer.

I get my news from a huge variety of sources, both open media and not open. It is a mistake on your part to assume that I am a Bush person though. That is a very easy trap to fall into, as is depending on what you believe by reading newspapers. A newspaper is a selective sampling of many sources of information. Articles are picked by an editorial board for that days edition from a vast array of possibilities for that day. I prefer raw news feeds and I have access to them.

Btw, for response why Bush IS dimwitted, look at my above list…[/QUOTE]