Well... here 'Fahrenheit 9/11' is.

POSTED BY: Quicksand
UPDATED: Thursday, March 30, 2006 17:02
VIEWED: 28615
PAGE 7 of 13

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE

JASONZZZ

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BlueSunWorshipper:

...

There's a scene in the movie that your rant reminds me of, one in which a grieving mother listens to an Iraqi woman protesting the slaughter of Iraqi children and US soldiers in the war. An uninformed bigot of a woman steps up and declares the whole scene is a sham, staged for the camera. She shuts up real quick when the grieving mother states emphatically that her son not only died in Iraq, but in Carbala on April 2nd. The uninformed woman (dubbed "bitch" by a large percentage of the audience) walks away muttering effectively that a lot of people have died in Iraq.

Yeah, a lot of people have.

Wake up and smell the crude, dude.

- T

huh? I think this rant, while interesting, belongs in another thread.

BLUESUNWORSHIPPER

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:25 PM

Oh, and has it occured to ANY of you Bushites that both Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were either put in power and/or supported by the CIA?

OH, OH...and that REAGAN AND BUSH helped support them there IN THE FIRST PLACE?!! Also, Reagan abandoned Osama's freedom fighters in Afghanistan after the Soviets were pushed out, then Bush, Sr. abandoned the Iraqi insurgents when they rose against Saddam during the Gulf War, and were later slaughtered for their trouble

...and everybody wonders why the Iraqi's and Osama hate our guts. Liberators, my a$$.

Does that strike ANYBODY as funny? 'Cuz it doesn't seem all that funny to me.

Most of the people on this board bashing the movie probably haven't even seen it, but all sound like the crowd that bashed the protesters when the war began: "Oh, they must hate freedom. Why do they hate freedom?"

Orwell had it right, he just predicted it a little early, is all.

BLUESUNWORSHIPPER

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Quote:
Originally posted by BlueSunWorshipper:

...

There's a scene in the movie that your rant reminds me of, one in which a grieving mother listens to an Iraqi woman protesting the slaughter of Iraqi children and US soldiers in the war. An uninformed bigot of a woman steps up and declares the whole scene is a sham, staged for the camera. She shuts up real quick when the grieving mother states emphatically that her son not only died in Iraq, but in Carbala on April 2nd. The uninformed woman (dubbed "bitch" by a large percentage of the audience) walks away muttering effectively that a lot of people have died in Iraq.

Yeah, a lot of people have.

Wake up and smell the crude, dude.

- T

huh? I think this rant, while interesting, belongs in another thread.

...why? This thread is about Fahrenheit 9/11, yes?

- T

SUCCATASH

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:28 PM

Jason, I think you are going to pop a blood vessel if you keep posting.

Usually you are polite and eloquent, but you've become a snarling and snapping madman.

JASONZZZ

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Melee:
Like I said, I refuse to get into political debates, so I'm not going to write out a big long and indignant response to that as I am tempted to do. All I will say, is that I definatly do not buy into sensationalism. That is your opinion and you can keep it, I don't care. I was just trying to understand the situation, and I have done that. The end.

*goes and hides under a table with Mr. Fluff from all this political crap*

ok, well, thanks for the understanding. I don't buy into any of MM's sensationalistic crap either. Whatever the undercarrying message is, he could have done it better with more integrity - if he had wanted to come out and enter it as documentary and put it together as a documentary and in a documentary style. Yeah, stuff like this isn't really worth the type of long diatribe necessary, but hey, if you've got to set the record straight and you have to describe it blow-by-blow - maybe that's what you've got to do. I am glad that you agreed.

MACBAKER

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Melee:
Oh lord, I swore I wouldn't get into any political debates... I hate politics... but I need to ask, just for the sake of knowing: The general message behind the movie is that Bush needs to be out of power. Are you saying you disagree with that?

I don't disagree with that that all. Personally, I am totally against the current administration's move into IRAQ. We should have worked harder with the UN, before making such a move. Even the majority of UN members agreed that Saddam needed to be removed from power, but it was felt that other methods should have been tried, before resulting in a full scale attack. By making such a move without UN support, we made ourselves the target for everyone (including terrorists, and liberals like Michael Moore) that believes the US is a big bully forcing their will on everyone else. Maybe we are, but the majority of UN members agreed with us, they just didn't agree with our administration's choice of how to deal with the problem by using military force. I'm not sure 10 more years of UN inspections and fly overs would have changed anything, but going in without UN supoort wasn't right either.

My question is, do any of you actually believe that Kerry will get into office and end the war on terror, and pull out our troops? Do you believe that if he did, this would somehow fix everything, and those mean ole' missunderstood terrorists would now leave us alone?

If you think he will, you are mistaken! Kerry knows we have to stay and see this through. To abandon Iraq or Afganistan at this point would do more to destabilize these regions than staying, to insure that these new democracies have a chance to stand up and survive on their own. If we suddenly pulled out, and let the first power hungry war lord to take over, we'd be even more hated than we are today. Kerry will have to do the same thing the Bush administration is trying to do. He will have to get UN support to help provide assistance to these area's with UN peacekeepers and aid. Nation building is never easy, and our track record so far (The Shaw of Iran anyone?) isn't very good, which is why it's so important to have UN support.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

THEGREYJEDI

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:37 PM

My question is where does Michael Moore, a Canadian, get the idea that he's allowed to make a "film" like this? It would be like a US director making a "documentary" blaming Winston Churchill for the German raids on England during WWII. It's just silly.

"And these three remain: Faith, Hope, and Love. And the greatest of these Love."

MELEE

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:50 PM

Um, Michael Moore, isn't canadian... he's from Flint, Michigan.

MAUGWAI

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:56 PM

First off, I saw the movie.

About this whole: is it tripe, is it a "mockumentary", is it a work of art argument -

People write political books all the time. Dozens of high-profile political books have come out within the last year, even. Their goals are the same as Michael Moore's, whether it's Anne Coulter or Al Franken. They want to persuade people politically. They do it in print. Moore's expertise is in film, so he does it in film. It is a political commentary. He uses tons of facts, then he interprets them. Political writers do the same thing. He also leaves out tons of facts. Political writers do that too.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

MELEE

Monday, June 28, 2004 11:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

ok, well, thanks for the understanding. I don't buy into any of MM's sensationalistic crap either. Whatever the undercarrying message is, he could have done it better with more integrity - if he had wanted to come out and enter it as documentary and put it together as a documentary and in a documentary style. Yeah, stuff like this isn't really worth the type of long diatribe necessary, but hey, if you've got to set the record straight and you have to describe it blow-by-blow - maybe that's what you've got to do. I am glad that you agreed.

I think you misunderstand, I don't see Fahrenheit 9/11 as sensationalistic crap. Over-hyped maybe, but it had some valid points and for the most part I agreed with it. I'm just saying that I don't "buy into" anything. I may like a movie, but it's not going to make me suddenly change my opinions. Fahrenheit 9/11 just happened to be along the lines of what my beliefs already were.

And to answer another question that was just posed. No, electing Kerry isn't going to suddenly make everything all better. Not at all. Personally, I was rooting for Howard Dean and the only reason I'm voting for Kerry is because he's not Bush, and I truly hate Bush (for a lot of things, many completely unrelated to Iraq).

NO! NO! *slaps hand* No more! I swear this is the end of my involvement in this discussion *mumbles something about politics and mongoose food and wanders away*

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE