Fahrenheit 911 soundtrack

[neo33]

"I kinda liked a bunch of what Ernie had to say, but I may not put him in the great visionary category - as a matter of fact his double vision caused quite a bit of problems over time."

At least Hemingway had a vision. Moore doesn't! He has a "political" agenda.

To call F 9/11 a documentary is quite disturbing!

Webster:

doc·u·men·ta·ry - Pronunciation Key (dky-mnt-r)

adj.

- Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.

[damonrpayne]

Agreed gentlemen.

I posted a link written by a hard core Democrat who absolutely detested Moore's methods. This person equated many of his tactics to the worst kid of lying, and really felt the Democratic party needs a better person than Moore doing things like this. That thread was deleted but if anyone is interested I can PM you the link; as someone who typically votes Republican I still respect locially presented facts even when they don't agree with my ethos.

Honestly, I think way back with "Roger and Me" Moore had a much more reasonable message, but he's lost his roots. I wish there were people as popular as Moore but doing a better job. Even if someone was out there exposing my favorite politicians (if I had any) as corrupt plutocrats (which many on both sides are) with well presented facts, I'd have to applaud them for doing us all a favor.

It just seems odd to me why someone should have to stoop to Moore's level; most Americans would probably agree there is plenty of bad stuff going on in our government that one wouldn't have to look very hard or make anything up to get a sensational story

[Klipschfoot]

One retort to Moore, PROVE IT. He is just another Hollywood weenie who cannot engage deeper than tangentially. F 9/11 is no more than barbershop intellectualism + pusillanimity. I saw him on a talk show recently. His vacuous comments were sophomoric at best. Privately schooled teenagers would eat him for breakfast intellectually. No wonder the he was loved at Cannes.

[Fish]

There's also a really good book out,Michel Moore,Big Fat Stupid White Guy.Really,no joke,it should be at your favorite book store but,look burried deep behind,in the back of the store.There is a big problem with this book being hidden in bookstores,why?Don't know cause its #3 on Amazon,where it can't be hidden.The point is Michel Moore is everything and MOORE that he rails against.

Moore could sacrifice 6 meals a day,feed several starving families and still live on the other 8 meals.Not that I have anything against anyone being overweight mind you.Only when they're stuffin' their face and pockets while crying for humanities woes,and everyone elses shortcomings,pretty disgusting ain't it? Check out moorelies.com

[dkp]

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

On 7/12/2004 9:52:53 PM damonrpayne wrote:

Agreed gentlemen.

I posted a link written by a hard core Democrat who absolutely detested Moore's methods. This person equated many of his tactics to the worst kid of lying, and really felt the Democratic party needs a better person than Moore doing things like this. That thread was deleted but if anyone is interested I can PM you the link;

as someone who typically votes Republican

I still respect locially presented facts even when they don't agree with my ethos.

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

damonrpayne,

Send me the link when you get a minute.

Referring to the emboldened text (no pun intended) above-I knew there was a reason I liked you!!

David

[damonrpayne]

dkp, you have mail.

[Juba310]

Its posts like Klipschfoots that get these otherwise harmless threads completely out of hand and eventually closed. This started out simply to discuss the music used in the film. I don't think the intention was to start anything but a simple discussion.

[skeptic]

"Its posts like Klipschfoots that get these otherwise harmless threads completely out of hand and eventually closed."

Agreed.

" This started out simply to discuss the music used in the film. I don't think the intention was to start anything but a simple discussion. "

Not Agreed. This whole thread was a politcal sham wrapped in audio lingo. Go back and read the first post. It is obviously just an attempt to talk about the politics of the movie using audio terms. He didn't even MENTION the actual songs that are in the movie, seems pretty tricky to hav a thread talking about the music, when he didn't even mention the songs that are present in the movie.

I liked the first post, and thought it was pretty clever. It just belongs in a different forum.

Note: I am one of those people who prefer to keep politics and religion off audio forums, if you couldn't tell.

[TheEAR]

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

On 7/12/2004 1:35:03 PM neo33 wrote:

With all due respects, Mr. Ear, have you look at yourself in the mirror lately and wonder about the purpose of your existence? To be helpful to society or to antagonize its people. Selfishness is an unforgivable crime against humanity and is punishable by forever banishment in the phantom zone.

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

Well "NEO" I had a look in the mirror this morning and...it was just jolly sarcastic ME! Go figure I saw nothing EVIL in there.Moore is pure EVIL.Just stick two horns on his head and you have the devil incarnated.

[sire]

I don't normally get involved in political or religious conversation as they tend to get heated quickly.

I will say this. I do take offense to Hollywood attempting to control the outcome of the election. I doubt if anyone in Hollywood has a clue what the real America is like or what it is like to dedicate your life for your country. But this is America and we defend the right for opposing opinions to be spoken.

I served for 20 years. I understood completely what I signed up for. Families and military need to understand up front prior to enlisting. They are committing to putting their life on the line for the defense of their country. It isn't sign up to get college money, have a steady job to make a few $$$, etc.

I personally would rather fight abroad then have my family at risk fighting in the streets of America. I mean, just recall the Towers falling. I will never forget and I will never forgive. Typically other countries count on Americans having short term memories. I am hoping no one forgets the horror of 9/11

I apologize in advance if I got on my soapbox. I am done.

Mike

[damonrpayne]

I agree with your point about Hollywood sire. Are these spoiled kooks so out of touch with reality that they think their political opinion matters more because they were in a movie? Yup. This same disconnection with anything remotely resembling normal humans and their concerns is also giving us a lot of horribly vapid movies as well.

As for the armed forces, it is not they themselves who use glamourous TV ads and promises of college money etc?

[neo33]

"As for the armed forces, it is not they themselves who use glamourous TV ads and promises of college money etc?"

It pays both way! Nothing is for free in America. You give some to take some. Though Hollywood always goes way over its head.

[Klipschfoot]

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

"Its posts like Klipschfoots that get these otherwise harmless threads completely out of hand and eventually closed."

Agreed.

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

Hardly. My critique centers around Moore's credibility as a documentarian and his method of misrepresenting facts. This is the movie forum and my post did not get deleted and the thread is still active. Nobody was insulted. Just a little tongue-in-cheek commentary. Threads don't get closed for voicing an opinion - just when the personal insults start flinging. I guess I'm the skeptic around here.

[Audible Nectar]

Michael Moore is scratching an itch that needs to be scratched.

First, I'll say that I am dissapointed in the criticisms of this film based on party lines. The most glaring issues brought forth in the film should concern ALL of us. The most beneficial criticisms of the film have been written by more moderate and liberal voices, IMO - but Moore is generally looking for answers to the right questions. In that childhood game of "hot or cold", Moore is getting pretty warm.

What Moore gets right:

The media isn't "liberal" - they are CORPORATE, and as such, will be beholden to what is in thier best interests - profits. It is not about the duty to inform, it is about the duty to make money. In that effort, it has become evident that the corporate interests that control media are the same who are influencing government policy. Corporations benefit from the "lassez faire" non regulatory/tax friendly government, and are increasingly beholden to the government who assists them in these goals. Go against the grain, and the press is denied access to Gov't. Go along, and the laws will be set up to favor them. Quid pro quo.

This is counter to what the role of the press should be - a truly independent body. There is little true "investigative" reporting anymore, just different faces on the same old pitch. There are numerous "all news" networks out there, all offering essentially the same package. Go see the latest film out, hear the latest Britney CD, and witness violence, at home and abroad. See the freaks (one of the Menendez brother's wives) and the latest on the Scott Peterson trial on Larry King. Larry, isn't there more important topics to discuss?

The Media fuels FEAR, along with the government. The government uses fear as a means of control. Media (as they seemingly always do) only see two sides to any story, when there are many. Us vs. Them. Good vs. Evil. Dem vs. Repub. Liberal vs. Conservative. Good vs. Bad. The discussions should be "X as it relates to Y as it relates to Z". That can encompass all spectrum of discussion and opinion, instead of just "black and white". This is what I see as "the dumbing down" of news coverage - all you need to know in 30 seconds, even though they have all day and night.

Evidence of the fear component has been very prevalent since 9/11, and the media is complicit in this as well. See the "Today" clip in the film where the salesman is pitching the skyscraper safety jumping getup, as the woman struggles to show you how easy this is to put on. Was anyone gullible enough to buy this? And just what did all of those Nor'easters do with all of that duct tape they bought as a result of the anthrax scare? And what benefit has come from this color coded homeland security warning system anyway?

More recently, the fear component as a means of control was in further evidence. Two days following John Kerry's VP announcement, Tom Ridge comes on the TV to announce that the terrorists are intending to attack us in order to disrupt our elections. While it is my personal opinion that the US is "about due" (based on past patterns of attacks directed at the US, and other places), the timing of this announcement reeks of politics, too. Be afraid....very afraid. Insinuation: You cannot trust anyone else to keep us safe and secure. Welcome to the concept of fear - used as a political tool.

The relationship of the US and Saudis, and the ultimate purpose of the war: RESOURCES. This is still the "big elephant" in the room that no one really wants to talk about. We have heard all manner of debate about liberating the Iraqis, Saddam's ability to attack us, and that Iraq is the central front for the war on terror, but the issue of resources, and our "right" to consume them, has not been discussed. If it were MY son or daughter in Iraq, I wouldn't be driving a Hummer here at home. Why the US public cannot have an open discussion of this issue is beyond my comprehension - and proof that something in the flow of information is amiss - BIG TIME. The US government, the press, and those who agree with them have yet to answer to this issue in any meaningful way.

This issue is further blurred by facts in evidence that do not support an invasion of Iraq: The fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, the fact that Saddam and Osama were formerly supported by the US, and the cushy relationship that the Bushes (and others who have gov't access) have with the Saudis. Again, the US government or media has yet to give any creedence to these issues - or given us any reason that these issues should be ignored. While admittedly, much of the truth surrounding this issue is critical to US national security policy, and is therefore classified (and therefore, will be kept out of the public eye in order to maintain a US security advantage), I get the feeling that those we are warring against (joe terrorist) know more about what is really going on - and where the battles really are, than the US populace does. In the game of "hot or cold", the US public is ice cold. The blame for this rests on the US media and US citizenry, for allowing such complacency.

Which brings me to a good place to address where Moore goes a bit astray........

There are many more facts in evidence for Moore to reinforce his points. He should have informed the viewer of "The Project for a New American Century", a conservative thinktank formed in the late 90's, outlining the plan to invade Iraq. This group is made up of people currently in the Bush administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, amongst others). In part, it describes a future vision to invade Iraq as a doorway to stabilizing the Middle East, and dictates that the US should preemptively eliminate anyone who attempts to challenge the military dominance of the US in any way. Essentially, it is a recipe for US empire......but furthermore, it is rock solid proof that the idea of invading Iraq as a central front on the war on terror and that Saddam linking to 9/11 is a smokescreen for the plan that these people had all along. The idea for invading Iraq didn't happen as a result of 9/11 - it was planned, all along, before Bush "won" the election. It is damning evidence, and has gotten NO play in the mainstream press.

Moore also plays a bit too much to the emotions, when there again is much evidence to make his point otherwise. Still, I find those "press clippings you haven't seen" very enlightening. The "seven minutes" reveal what I have believed about Bush all along - that Bush is simply the "public face" for this administration - a "CEO" - and a micromanager. Bush isn't the one pushing the buttons here, it's those below him (especially the Pentagon, on the foreign policy front). Those below Bush set the policy, Bush's job is to sell it. He's the world's most powerful advertiser, in control of the world's most powerful methods for delivering the message. But he is NOT the decision maker......certainly not of the mold of Truman's "the buck stops here" ethos.

Moore also omits some points that should be noted. For example, Clinton was just as complicit in the Saudi pandering.....he kissed thier rears as much as the past repub administrations did. That still does not mean that the issue dissappears, however. It is still an issue. If democracy is important in Iraq, it should be important in Saudi Arabia, too. If Saudi Arabia has the right to be something other than a democracy, doesn't Iraq?

But that is Moore's style, to emotionally charge the point he's driving home. He uses this as an attention getter, and an impetus to action. Moore is speaking to the public on a level that they understand......right down to the emotional pandering. It's what Moore believes he needs to do to get through to "Joe Public". While I am personally more convinced by hard evidence than emotional pandering, he uses it to the fullest. Many of us who stay informed on these issues saw little new in the way of evidence in this work. However, it should be an eye opener to the US public. And it is.....at least to those who have seen it. Everyone I have conversed with who has seen the film sees something here that hits home....and has them talking. And that is where the real success of this work exists.

Many have attached the label of "propaganda" to this film, and by the Webster's definition, it is. This film is an attempt to persuade the viewer to a point of view, and Moore makes no apologies, nor attempts to hide this fact. However, I submit to you that if Moore's work is propaganda, then so is what we hear from the US government and media on a daily basis. EVERYONE has a right to thier opinion, and EVERYONE should be thirsty for information on these issues. The object, in my view, is to get as much information out there as possible, have meaningful open dialogue on these issues, and deny anyone the opportunity to silence other opinions. Let the information flow. We are too smart for 30 second soundbytes. As voting citizens of the world's so called bastien of freedom and democracy, we, and humanity, deserve better. The personal attacks on Moore only say to me that the author has no factual argument, and cannot discuss these issues in a civil way. If you think that Moore's film is BS, then attack the argument Moore makes, and not Moore. Moore has the right to speak, as does everyone living in the good ol' USA.

Most of all, Moore is pointing the finger at US - the people at large. More than Bush, the republicans, the military-industrial complex, the media, or the democrats (who vote like republicans anyway)......he's pointing the finger at US. He's telling us to wake up and smell the coffee. I've been smelling this cup for a while, and it's getting stale. The most difficult thing to do in life is to admit that we are wrong......and understanding the points driven home in "9/11" is to admit that we were collectively wrong, and still are, on many levels. That's hard to do.....and IMO, a major reason folks have trouble digesting this. The first step to solving a problem is admitting to having one in the first place.

[middlecreekguy]

Best post I`ve read in months. Even if it did make me late for work.

[RickB]

Audible Nectar, great post. It's good to know there are still some people out there with their eyes and minds fully open.

[Juba310]

Interesting read. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

[hwatkins]

Some very interesting and well reasoned posts in this thread (although that is not an inclusive statement). While, as I said, Moore is not my style - I encourage everyone to focus on the facts and try darn hard to not let the pleasing 'match my bias' information sway you greatly.

A bit of research can yield an interestingly complete picture. It may become a novel, albiet original intention, way of deciding your vote.

[edwinr]

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

On 7/5/2004 7:50:56 PM Fish wrote:

For one thing read your dictionary to define"propaganda"it does not mean documentary.Also I would like to hear the funeral march at that expletive deleted son of a @#$%^^%$#$$$'s next showing.So,are politics back in?The mention of that $%^&^&^%$$$$$'s name is political,left?

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

Hey, guess what? I heard @#$%^^%$#$$$ arrived in Australia for a promotional visit.

I thought our border protection protocols were better than that!

[edwinr]

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

On 7/12/2004 4:42:10 PM neo33 wrote:

Great lessons can be learned from 'The Old Man and the Sea'..., 'Moby Dick'..."

Indeed! Ernest Hemingway was a great visionary thinker. Moore is not and nothing can be learned from him. Moore has an agenda and he is set out to destroy the world.

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

Good comment!