kill michael moore

[jonnyp]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Yup. War is never a "nice" thing. War is horrific. But what is more horrific - war, or allowing murdering tyrants to murder tens of thousands of people decade after decade?

*oh dear* been here a full 3 posts and i'm getting into arguments with the forum owner.. ah well, off we go

Of course Saddam's crimes were horrific, but the fact that Bush and Blair manipulated evidence in order to convince a suspect public that their war, which, alongside the US Marines they DO count, is now estimated to have caused the death of tens of thousands of Iraqi people they don't even bother to count properly ( www.iraqibodycount.org ) is a serious matter indeed.

Just as serious as the way Donald Rumsfeld was deeply involved in arming and equipping Saddam during the 1980s - there's some classic archive footage of the two all handshakes and grins - to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians.. weapons he then turned on the Kurds and the Kuwatis.
Interestingly enough, the Kurds got gassed a couple of months before Rumsfeld met Saddam all smiles and joy - Bush Sr only got worried and sent in troops when Saddam started harrassing Kuwait, an oil-rich ally (also ruled by a human rights abusing tyrant)

Or the way that every chemical weapon strain that Saddam possessed at the time of the first gulf war (there is still little evidence he had *any* in the second round) was supplied to him by the US and the UK.

Or the fact that due to the sanctions imposed by the US and UK, and the Depleted Uranium (DU) used in rounds fired by the coalition in both wars have killed half a million iraqi children. The DU has left a legacy of an extremely high incidence of cancer throughout Iraq as, when fired, the DU turns to dust in the air, carried accross the desert on the wind and deep into people's lungs, leaving a legacy of tumours and birth defects for years to come.

Whatever your opinion of M Moore (I think he's a patronising, over simplifying presenter) it holds true that all his claims I have encountered (have not yet seen the film, just read articles about it) I have seen made in other places, by other respected sources.

And over here in the UK I found it all the more depressing to see how fickle our country was, but the other way around - opinion polls went from 92% opposed to the war to 60% pro the day rolling news coverage started on three channels, with constant calls to 'support our troops' - mass media hammering 'patriotism' home so hard people feel alienated if they dont just swallow it and repeat over and over like a mantra.

Course claiming saddam had nukes and could spray us with poison in 45 minutes probably helped too.. pity they were lies, wasn't it?

[Leader of Men]

He should be deported to Iraq, see how much he likes it then!

[Caped Crusader]

Originally Posted by rwotiz

Seeing him get booed on stage while accpeting an award was of the highlights of my life.

You should get out more. A lot more.

Originally Posted by theSpear

if someone wants to expres their freedom of speech they shouldnt use their once succesful filming career to do it.

You mean like Ronald Reagan?

And once successful? This film beat BFC's entire theatrical run in its first weekend. He's more successful today than he's ever been, and most of that success is due to the big stink the bashers have been making. Congratulations.

Originally Posted by chaka42

i dunno john, moore sure does a good job of making saddam look like a saint ....

So I take it you've seen the film, right? Because I'm sure you wouldn't make a statement like that without being certain of it's accuracy.

When did we suddenly get to a point that documentaries are supposed to be without bias? All documentaries are presented from the filmmaker's point of view. Rightists want to apply a serious double standard to Moore's work, but it's nothing more than sour grapes, and people see through that. Only the talk radio crowd is taking this anti-Moore junk seriously. I'm not the biggest Michael Moore fan, personally. Believe it or not, a lot of his views fall to the right of my own. But I'm not going to trash the guy and pretend he's a traitor because we have differences of opinion.

[imaginemn]

Everyone has the right to their opinion whether you agree with them or not. To me it's just another movie and the more controversial the movie the better it has for success. In the end Moore is using ANOTHER tragic situation and making money off of it. I recently read that there are two other movies due to come out soon that contradict Moore's point of view. Not sure on the titles or release dates but it should make it interesting. Anyways after this weekend and the numbers come in for Spiderman 2 that’s what the media will start to focus on.

Originally Posted by Caped Crusader

But I'm not going to trash the guy and pretend he's a traitor because we have differences of opinion.

I tend to agree with this statement but it doesn’t apply to Moore because he has said in many occasions that "I'm going to leave the country if Bush wins again" well if that is not traitor material what is? As an ex-military fighter pilot in the Air Force remarks like this are just wrong IMO.

imaginemn

[Caped Crusader]

Originally Posted by imaginemn

I tend to agree with this statement but it doesn’t apply to Moore because he has said in many occasions that "I'm going to leave the country if Bush wins again" well if that is not traitor material what is? As an ex-military fighter pilot in the Air Force remarks like this are just wrong IMO.

First of all, I interpret such a comment as being hyperbolic. It's like saying, "If I don't get home by six o'clock, my wife will kill me." Even if Dubya wins again, I'm sure Michael Moore will still be here, working toward change, just like the rest of us.

Secondly, what's wrong with moving out of the country? People do it all the time. If someone doesn't want to live under the rule of the Bush administration, how is leaving treasonous? People come to this country every day because they were unhappy with the government in their homeland. It doesn't mean you don't love the country; it means you don't like the government. I know a lot of Cuban immigrants, and they are some of the most patriotic people you could ever meet. They love Cuba. They just hate Castro.

[imaginemn]

I may not agree with what you say and may not always agree with the administration (whether it's Bush, Clinton or whomever), but I'll defend this country to the death for your right to say it.

I know a lot of Cuban immigrants, and they are some of the most patriotic people you could ever meet. They love Cuba. They just hate Castro.

Do you actually think they have the same rights in Cuba that they do in the US? I wonder what would have happened to him if he was from Cuba and made a similar film about Castro? It's not wrong to want to leave the country because you want to. What I feel is wrong is leaving for the wrong reasons or making stupid statements like this. Now I could understand if he (moore) was banned from filmaking or jailed for making this type of film. But that's the luxury of living in the US. You CAN make a film like this and bash the leader of our country and not have to worry about being killed or jailed.

imaginemn

[Caped Crusader]

Originally Posted by imaginemn

Do you actually think they have the same rights in Cuba that they do in the US?

Of course not, but that has little relevancy in terms of the analogy I presented.

Originally Posted by imaginemn

It's not wrong to want to leave the country because you want to. What I feel is wrong is leaving for the wrong reasons or making stupid statements like this.

Which is it? You'll defend the right to free speech, or you think it's treason? Calling someone a traitor is a serious charge, and not something I think should be tossed out lightly as a buzz word. That's what has been happening lately on this subject, and even worse, the term has been thrown at anti-war protestors for years.

Again, the comment strikes me as nothing more than hyperbole.

[rswis]

Moore is a fat anti-American slob.

[Thanol]

Originally Posted by rswis

Moore is a fat anti-American slob.

Just because he speaks poorly of Bush doesn't make him anti-american.

[Leader of Men]

Originally Posted by Thanol

Just because he speaks poorly of Bush doesn't make him anti-american.

Okay, he's a fat, idiot, slob. However you look at him, he's an idiot and I hate him.

[Velocity]

Mark my words!
Bush will never win again.

[Buskerdoo]

Originally Posted by jonnyp

Or the way that every chemical weapon strain that Saddam possessed at the time of the first gulf war (there is still little evidence he had *any* in the second round) was supplied to him by the US and the UK.

Or the fact that due to the sanctions imposed by the US and UK, and the Depleted Uranium (DU) used in rounds fired by the coalition in both wars have killed half a million iraqi children.

Two things are a pity in these discussions. 1) I'm up late and addresssing it. 2) Several of you people, who spend countless hours on the internet, don't research what you've been told. Don't be sheep do your own research!

It's really sad that jonnyp here and probably several others don't realize that several bombs full of sarin and mustard gas HAVE been found. One of these, correctly detonated, has the possibilty to kill 60,000 people. And don't give the line they were around from before the first war. That's like something a little kid would say to protect his rear. "oh my, I forgot I left that weapon laying around that will kill a LOT of people." side note: I'm pretty sure that most assertions that the chemicals came from the US or UK are referring to private companies, not the governments.

The depleted uranium story killing 500 thousand kids is unproven fiction.



As for Mr. Moore: Someone should make a movie called "I'm Michael Moore and I'm a Fat Pig"
There could be shots of Michael himself say he is definitly a fat pig. There could be shots of his mother saying he's a fat pig. Shots of John Kerry calling Michael a fat pig.
All of these would obviously be spliced and dubbed from a lot of seperate footage shot at totally different times and possible even different years. But hey, call it a documentary and the sheep will come and believe every word of it. They will walk away saying that ole Michael Moore must be a Big Fat Pig because he himself said it in the documentary.

So, do you get my point?

Do your own research. Find out what's fact and what is fiction.

[Rivux]

Originally Posted by Buskerdoo

As for Mr. Moore: Someone should make a movie called "I'm Michael Moore and I'm a Fat Pig"

Why the need to attack what he looks like? Nearly every post on this forum that is anti-moore has to make a comment about how he looks. Is this grade 3, is that all you people have as a rebuttal is that he is fat? What are you going to do next, say his mom is ugly and that your dad can beat up his dad?

If someone has an issue with the film, then make arguments and rebuttals based on the film and statements made in the film. If he says Bush lied about something, then show proof that Bush didn't lie about it. The only thing worse then someone who lies is someone who refutes a lie with name calling. Grow up. Pretty soon you guys are going to start with the "I know you are but what am I" argument.

[schmeg007]

Originally Posted by Buskerdoo

As for Mr. Moore: Someone should make a movie called "I'm Michael Moore and I'm a Fat Pig"

Which puts him in the position of being representative of the american population.

[jonnyp]

Originally Posted by Buskerdoo

It's really sad that jonnyp here and probably several others don't realize that several bombs full of sarin and mustard gas HAVE been found. One of these, correctly detonated, has the possibilty to kill 60,000 people. And don't give the line they were around from before the first war. That's like something a little kid would say to protect his rear. "oh my, I forgot I left that weapon laying around that will kill a LOT of people." side note: I'm pretty sure that most assertions that the chemicals came from the US or UK are referring to private companies, not the governments.

The depleted uranium story killing 500 thousand kids is unproven fiction.

Ok, so old cartridges HAVE been found. Not sure about the mustard gas, I've heard no such thing. But yes, there was a story yesterday about finding Cyclosarin - more deadly than sarin : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3861197.stm
However, and I quote:

But the US military said that while two of the rockets tested positive for sarin, traces of the agent were so small and deteriorated as to be virtually harmless.

"These rounds were determined to have limited to no impact if used by insurgents against coalition forces," a statement by the military said.

Another 16 rockets found by the Polish troops were all empty and tested negative for any type of chemicals, it added, without explaining the discrepancy in numbers with the Polish version.

'without explaining the discrepancy in numbers'
Poland has a population that's pretty anti their troops being deployed in Iraq. There have been many kidnappings and deaths on their side, so it would not be surprising if this is being played up to win support at home - 'look, we are doing something useful!'
After all, the US needs to repair its credibility since it is becoming clear that (even if there was a very small amount of chemical weapons found) there were either gross exaggerations or pure fabrications (depending on the claim) of the quantity and of the threat.

Found something on the mustard gas (this time from the guardian, january 2004)

However, the find of a small amount of mortar shells is unlikely to satisfy a growing chorus of criticism that the much-touted weapons of mass destruction either never existed or were destroyed years ago. The Danish team has found only 36 mortar rounds buried in desert about 45 miles from Al Amarah, a southern town. But it added that up to a 100 more could still be hidden at the location. The rounds were in plastic bags and some were leaking. It seems they had been buried for at least 10 years.

If they'd been around ten years that seems to suggest they had been 'disposed of' or even forgotten about. While I realise that's conjecture on my part, I still don't feel that 36 mortar rounds justifies a war that killed 12,000+ iraqis and around a thousand coalition troops. Maybe you don't agree - perhaps despite him not being a threat to us it's justified to break all international laws and protocols to remove him, perhaps to protect the kurds?
You still haven't offered a good reason for the US continuing to fund Saddam after, and in full knowlege of the gassing of the Kurds in 1988 .

On Depleted Uranium: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/1118306.stm

Dr Jawad, who works at the Cancer Hospital in Basra, says the rate of cancer has increased nine-fold since the Gulf War.

The bbc have a very interesting section on the whole issue (that this article was linked from) here : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/...um/default.stm

So I beg to differ. I have done my own research. Satisfaite?

[Buskerdoo]

Originally Posted by Rivux

Why the need to attack what he looks like? Nearly every post on this forum that is anti-moore has to make a comment about how he looks.

I absolutely agree we shouldn’t make an issue about people’s appearance. I was using it to prove a point! You can’t just take a bunch of out takes from different clips and piece them together and try to pass it off as fact.

Did you complain when Al Franken wrote “Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot�

[Buskerdoo]

I was thinking that a discussion of the whole WMD issue was and is really just a smokescreen. Originally there were several points brought up concerning UN Violations. WMD's were just one point. The press and Hollywood have made this their poster child thought to say the US went into Iraq over a lie, etc. What about all the other human rights issues carried out by Saddam and the Iraq regime?

Food for thought:

"Bush Outlines Iraqi U.N. Violations
Thursday, September 12, 2002

Bush cited Iraq as an example of a rogue regime that poses an immediate threat in its willingness to act against other nations or assist terrorist groups.

"In one place and one regime, we find all these dangers in their most lethal and aggressive forms, exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront," Bush told the General Assembly. "Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself."

After appeasing the U.N. by announcing that the U.S. would return to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Bush told the international body that Iraq must comply with U.N. sanctions or be punished accordingly.

"We will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolutions, but the purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced. The just demands of peace and security must be met or action will be unavoidable and a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power."


"Events can turn in one of two ways," Bush said.

Armed with a point-by-point list of Saddam Hussein's transgressions included in a White House paper entitled "A Decade of Defiance and Deception of the United Nations," the president detailed how Saddam has continued to develop weapons of mass destruction, engaged in egregious human-rights violations, participated in international terrorism, sought to evade economic sanctions and kept Kuwaiti property that should have been returned after the 1991 Gulf War.

Bush said Saddam has engaged in systematic human rights violations, including the "arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation and rape" of tens of thousands of Iraqis.

"[Saddam] has fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel. He has gassed many Iranians and 40 Kurdish villages."

"From 1991-1995 the Iraqi regime said it had no biological or chemical weapons," Bush said. After a science team defected, Iraq admitted that it had enough anthrax to load it onto SCUD missiles and in other dispersal mechanisms.

"United Nations inspections also reviewed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons," Bush said.

"Open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder," he added.

After the president's speech, Iraq's U.N. ambassador accused Bush of speaking out of revenge and political ambition.

"He chooses to deceive the world and his own people "

Notice, WMD is just one point.

[Buskerdoo]

On a lighter note:

Does anyone here think we could go over to a forum on Politics and get a 3-4 page thread going on the topic of "Ethical versus Unethical SEO Techniques"

If you're in the USA, have a great 4th of July weekend and celebrate the freedoms you enjoy.

[SVB]

lol yeah, we can talk about anything at V7n.

[Rivux]

Originally Posted by Buskerdoo

Did you complain when Al Franken wrote “Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot�

I never knew he did, though that does sound like something that Al Franken would say. lol