livendive 8 #101 July 8, 2004 Quotewhy Tuna... you're more left than I am! My political compass Economic Left/Right: -2.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.41 I'm more libertarian than lefty. I'm all for personal freedoms, and I've found the republican party wants to restrict too many. Main reason I remain registered democrat is that I want a say in the democratic primaries. Economic Left/Right: -2.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.41 The only reason I principally vote democrat is because those candidates have the best chances of beating the republicans who want to turn this country into a theocracy devoid of any individual liberties. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #102 July 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteyou're avoiding my question. How would you suggest we continue to be able to exercise our freedom of speech, which is one of our fundamental rights that makes us American, without looking "weak" to the terrorists? It's actually amazing to me that this is even a question. I would say that answer should come from within your own sense of values. Ask yourself if your criticism is coming from a true concern that a policy may be wrong or that doing something a different way might produce a better end result or if your criticism comes from spite and hate. What I find amazing is that many pro-Bush people think that all anti-Bush sentiment is based on spite and hate, not on the former. I truly believe the GWB's policies are wrong and I think a better way exists. I also believe pro-Bush people believe they are the right policies, and the best way to act. But that isn't reciprocated. I can understand someone having a different point of view. I don't understand how they don't understand that I do and say it is just spite and hate. What reason do I have to criticize GWB other than his policies? And as far as criticism encouraging terrorism, it's a paper tiger. Ridge announced that the terrorists are gearing up for an attack to disrupt our democratic process of holding elections. Does that mean that having elections encourages terrorists? Well, yes, it does. Does that mean that we should change that policy and appoint a dictator instead? No. Does criticism of the president's policies encourage terrorists? Yes. Deos that mean we should stop criticize him when we honestly think he's doing the wrong thing and not representing our best interests? Hell no. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #103 July 9, 2004 Quote>If you want to spend your $10.00 to subject yourself to lies and > propoganda, be my guest. It doesn't change the fact that it's lies and >propoganda. But it does make you a little less than qualified to describe its contents. Buy a ticket to another movie then go into F911 That way you can see it, and not financially support it. Quoteanswering how to resist terrorism is not moore's job. That's the president's job, and frankly, I think he's screwed up. It is everybodys' job to resist terrorism. Treason: 1.Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies. 2.A betrayal of trust or confidence. I actually like the movie, it's fiction. I didn't believe Spiderman either! The coolest part of the movie was the kid in the tank with the Bloodhound Gang playing. ---- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #104 July 9, 2004 QuoteA betrayal of trust or confidence. Are you implying that GWB should be charged with treason? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #105 July 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteA betrayal of trust or confidence. Are you implying that GWB should be charged with treason? Clicky ---------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #106 July 9, 2004 QuoteI believe that people like Rush Limbaugh, by pushing for wars that create fertile grounds for terrorist recruters, ARE helping the terrorists recruit people. You agreed that the Iraq war was great for Al Qaeda's recruiting efforts; people who strongly support the war (as Rush did) helped Al Qaeda's recruiting efforts. Indirect vs direct. Although both might be used by the terrorists for their cause, it is only MM's flick that is openingly being supported, with them wanting to lend a hand in it's distribution and financial funding. Quotethen we should arrest him for aiding the enemy (which is what should have been done with Jane Fonda.) Agreed. QuoteHe's cherry-picking his info to present a different view on the Iraq war. That he is. Quote>People react because they are lead to believe there is a 'cause and >affect' when there was no such thing in the way Michael presented it. I saw the movie and I think I missed the "cause and effect" thing you're talking about. To what are you referring? Since I'm not blessed with a photographic memory, specific quotes can't be printed here....unfortunately. I -do- remember, however, wrenching at several points along the way when a scene would transition to another with 'believing gasps' coming from around me....and myself -knowing- that the effect MM sought was coming down....and -knowing- that the effect he presented had NOTHING to do with the cause he had just flashed before the audience. When the manuscript is available, I'd love to sit down with you and quade and decipher it.....independent of what others here have said, or other web sites have pond off as 'truth' or 'fiction'. I keep an open mind on most things.....however when untruths are being believed then we all have to speak up. No matter which side is spouting forth at the time. We listen. We debate. We learn. We change the world. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #107 July 9, 2004 QuoteI probably will at some point, maybe tomorrow, but tonight is bill paying night and I'm slacking even as I type (as usual). You make comments about something but you didn't READ the artical... Cart before the horse.... Maybe you should read it before you slam it?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #108 July 9, 2004 >Maybe you should read it before you slam it? Nonsense! Conservatives don't need to see F911 before slamming it, why should liberals be any different? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #109 July 9, 2004 QuoteNonsense! Conservatives don't need to see F911 before slamming it, why should liberals be any different? Because you liberals...and in particular you Bill like to slam people who don't bother to read things."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #110 July 9, 2004 >Because you liberals...and in particular you Bill like to slam people who >don't bother to read things. True, I do think that their opinions are les valid than the people who do read things. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craichead 0 #111 July 9, 2004 I don't approve of quade's criticising the article without reading it, either. Bad form on his part. However, billvon makes a really good point that some of your cronies are being rather hypocritical by criticising Moore's movie without seeing it. Do you support the conservatives' criticisms of Moore's movie without their having seen it? _Pm__ "Scared of love, love and aeroplanes...falling out, I said takes no brains." -- Andy Partridge (XTC) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #112 July 9, 2004 Quote I don't approve of quade's criticising the article without reading it, either. Bad form on his part. I only criticized those parts which I -had- read. I have not attempted to criticize those parts which I have yet to read.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #113 July 9, 2004 So... People are allowed to criticize BFC, or F/9-11 based on what they saw in the TV ads? _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #114 July 9, 2004 QuoteHowever, billvon makes a really good point that some of your cronies are being rather hypocritical by criticising Moore's movie without seeing it. Just like some of your cronies are supporting it without seeing it? QuoteDo you support the conservatives' criticisms of Moore's movie without their having seen it? I don't support anything MM does. Everything he has done is half truths with outright lies. But I do support his right to make such trash. And if someone wants to slam it based off of MM's history thats their right as well."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #115 July 9, 2004 at this point, I think its safe to say that most supporters have seen it already. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #116 July 9, 2004 >People are allowed to criticize BFC, or F/9-11 based on what they saw in the TV ads? Well, this is Speaker's Corner, where people go to bitch about stuff. People can base their bitching on whatever they want, from firsthand experience to something their sister's roommate's mom's friend saw. Other people might not take you seriously if you do the latter, but you are perfectly free to do it, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #117 July 9, 2004 I think people can comment on anything they wish. I think people's comments and opinions will be as valid as their own experience. If they've only experienced part of something, then their impression of that part is valid -- for them and as far as that goes. For instance, a lot of folks decided they didn't want to watch Michael Moore's film based on what they saw in a movie trailer or commercial. That's totally valid. They can legitimately comment on the movie trailer or the commercial. What they can not do is really have any valid opinion on the parts of the film they did not see. Flip that over to what I've said about this web site that tries to debunk various things in the movie. It's a pretty big web site. I know, I scrolled around a bit and it had all sorts of links to other articles. It would take quite a bit of time and energy to follow them all so I scrolled all the way down. I was looking for a logical conclusion -- a summary. What I found and read were the last two points the web site were trying to debunk. I did not find those two points to be credible based on my lifetime of experience in news, television and film.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #118 July 9, 2004 Quoteat this point, I think its safe to say that most supporters have seen it already. True, but I suspect another short bust here soon. Look I support his right to make such movies... However he is pandering to those who are not smart enough to make their own minds. A kid flying a kite? Come on thats just BS. But thats the very nature of an Editorial...And thats what this is. The problem is some who don't do any homework will take it all as fact...And there is some fact in it...but evennthat most times is twisted to get MM's view."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #119 July 9, 2004 Quote A kid flying a kite? Come on thats just BS. Are you telling me that it is inconceivable that on March 18, 2003, the day before the U.S. invaded Iraq, that no child in Iraq flew a kite? I believe the point of the sequence was to depict that the people of Iraq, before the U.S. invaded, was living fairly "normally" and for the most part peacefully by middle-eastern standards.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #120 July 9, 2004 >Are you telling me that it is inconceivable that on March 18, 2003, the >day before the U.S. invaded Iraq, that no child in Iraq flew a kite? It's BS to imply that there were anything other than terrorists and oppressed Iraqis squirming under Saddam's brutal rule in Iraq before March 2003. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craichead 0 #121 July 9, 2004 QuoteAnd if someone wants to slam it based off of MM's history thats their right as well. Okay, fair enough. Do you approve of that kind of behaviour, though? That is, in your personal opinion, is slamming/criticising a work without having seen/read/experienced it okay with you? Or is it bad when the "liberals" do it, and acceptable when the "conservatives" do it? _Pm__ "Scared of love, love and aeroplanes...falling out, I said takes no brains." -- Andy Partridge (XTC) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #122 July 9, 2004 QuoteAre you telling me that it is inconceivable that on March 18, 2003, the day before the U.S. invaded Iraq, that no child in Iraq flew a kite? I believe the point of the sequence was to depict that Iraq, before the U.S. invaded, was fairly "normal". No its possible, maybe even probable... But I wonder if any kites have flown since then? There have been several Iraqi's that have said life is better than before when SH was in power. There have been several Iraq's that are glad we went in... Why were they not interviewed?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #123 July 9, 2004 QuoteOkay, fair enough. Do you approve of that kind of behaviour, though? That is, in your personal opinion, is slamming/criticising a work without having seen/read/experienced it okay with you? Or is it bad when the "liberals" do it, and acceptable when the "conservatives" do it? I would say its a humans right if they lean left or right to make choices based of off the knowledge they have..(even if it is not the whole truth, or is just spitting back a party line). I would HOPE that the person looks at more than one source on anything before forming a solid opinion. MM movies are editorials...He does in fact twist the facts to get his opinion accross (As do ALL editorials). We don't have to look any further than his edited speech of Heston in "Bowling". I have not seen F911. I have seen parts....I have read about it on both pro and anti sites...I have found the "facts" he presents shaddy at best, and told with a distinctive editorial spin. But do I support a person right to make an uninformed choice? Yes, I would hope they would do a little checking and study to make a better informed choice...but thats just not going to happen with some people. Its funny I am labled Right, when in fact I am pretty left...I just don't trust MM to tell the truth, but I did give him the benefit of the doubt...Which is hard to do when he openly admits he wants this movie to help oust Bush. I personally think MM is a large piece of shit."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #124 July 9, 2004 I think the real point here is that both sides should listen to both sides of this argument. The war in Iraq is not the best thing since sliced bread, nor is it unmitigated evil. My personal opionion is that since the end does not, in fact, justify the means, we should spend a lot of time still making sure we address the original faulty process that led us into a war with bad intelligence, and without a significant consensus beyond our borders. War is extremely serious, and should be treated that way. Many people who suffer life-altering injuries or illnesses say that they're happy with many of the changes of attitude they had as a result of these injuries or illnesses. I don't think that means that we should stop trying to prevent them, however. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #125 July 9, 2004 QuoteMy personal opionion is that since the end does not, in fact, justify the means, we should spend a lot of time still making sure we address the original faulty process that led us into a war with bad intelligence, and without a significant consensus beyond our borders. War is extremely serious, and should be treated that way. who is ignoring it? I have said we had bad intel...But that does not mean automaticly that Bush lied...But many scream that as loud as they can as often as they can. THEY are hurting the process by going on a witch hunt, and they are not looking for just any witch...they know the one they want and they are just looking for a reason to burn him."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
