" The articles posted 'exposing' his fabrications have been some of the worst shit (there is simply no other word for it) I have seen posted in these forums."
Perhaps you could elaborate?
What interests me is that despite a great deal of searching, i haven't found anyone doing point-by-point defenses of the charges against Mr. Moore anywhere on the web.
The one calling his excercising of the right to free speech 'unamerican' was the only one worse than the simple-minded 'expose' of the editing process of documentaries.
...
I don't think anyone is calling "his excercising of the right to free speech 'unamerican'". Rather I think some may be calling his speech unamerican.
Often when some idiot on the left puts their foot in their mouth and they get pounded for it it ... they claim their right to free speech is being taken away. What they want is for others to stop using their right to free speech to criticize them.
I really enjoyed "Roger and Me" when I first saw it years ago. Kinda funny to see such a schlub laying it to those GM and Flint uppercrust types. I laughed out loud many times, but some scenes were very sad and made me sober up quickly (the family getting evicted and all).
But he's become completely unbearable the past several years.
There's no humor, really, just some rumpled lard-ass going "look at me stick it to The Man...and with made-up ammo, to boot...".
Where's the fun or talent in that? Anyone with an axe to grind, a video camera and iMovie can rival his recent output.
He's Rush without a) the humor b) the eloquence c) the talent d) the audience e) the cultural impact or f) popularity.
I know that just kills some of you, but, as usual, you'll just have to suck it up and deal with it best you can.
i think your simplifying it, it's about bush 41 and his relationship with the bin laden family as well.
If he can answer the question as to why the only airplane that was allowed to leave US airspace on 9|11 had the Bin Laden family on it I'll be satisfied.
Moore is Moore. He won't change. Now could someone give me the name of that ignorant, blonde, cunt (there is simply no other word for it) who wrote the book "Treason"? Now there's a person who deserves the title "Douchebag".
I really enjoyed "Roger and Me" when I first saw it years ago. Kinda funny to see such a schlub laying it to those GM and Flint uppercrust types. I laughed out loud many times, but some scenes were very sad and made me sober up quickly (the family getting evicted and all).
But he's become completely unbearable the past several years.
There's no humor, really, just some rumpled lard-ass going "look at me stick it to The Man...and with made-up ammo, to boot...".
Where's the fun or talent in that? Anyone with an axe to grind, a video camera and iMovie can rival his recent output.
He's Rush without a) the humor b) the eloquence c) the talent d) the audience e) the cultural impact or f) popularity.
I know that just kills some of you, but, as usual, you'll just have to suck it up and deal with it best you can.
I think he would make for a nice trash collector. Imagine his fat stinky ugly self on a trash truck that complements his features.
I could even see him eating bits and pieces of what he finds while collecting the trash.
What garbage....
Does he cover your route SPJ? you two could go to lunch and split a rotten banana
If he can answer the question as to why the only airplane that was allowed to leave US airspace on 9|11 had the Bin Laden family on it I'll be satisfied.
Oh, please post a credible link for this one. I gotta see this.
Having said that I no longer rate snopes, as they have been incapable of hiding their biases since 9/11 which is sad for a site that sets out to uncover the reality behind the rumours.
They're too busy defending the honour of America and the Republican party to actually let the facts speak for themselves which is often more interesting than the the lies being spun from both sides.
September 13-19, 2001: Members of bin Laden's family and important Saudis are "driven or flown under FBI supervision to a secret assembly point in Texas and then to Washington from where they left the country on a private charter plane when airports reopened three days after the attacks." The flights to Texas and Washington occur before the national air ban is lifted. [New York Times, 9/30/01] The Tampa Tribune reports that on September 13, Lear jet takes off from Tampa, Florida, carrying a Saudi Arabian prince, the son of the Saudi defense minister Prince Sultan (see August 2001 (G), August 31, 2001, August 15, 2002), as well as the son of a Saudi army commander, and flies to Lexington, Kentucky, where the Saudis own racehorses. They then fly a private 747 out of the country. Multiple 747s with Arabic lettering on their sides are already there, suggesting another secret assembly point. The Tampa flight left from a private Raytheon hangar [Tampa Tribune, 10/5/01] (Raytheon's name keeps coming up in relation to 9/11_(for instance, see September 25, 2001)). Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the US, helps move the bin Laden family out of the US. [London Times, 11/25/02] Ron Motley, the lead lawyer in a 9/11 lawsuit against many Saudi, points to the flights during the air ban as evidence that Saudi are "protected by the Bush administration" because of "oil." [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 8/16/02] There have been conflicting reports as to whether the FBI interviewed these people before they left the country. Osama bin Laden's half brother, Abdullah bin Laden, stated that even a month after 9/11 his only contact with the FBI was a brief phone call . [Boston Globe, 9/21/01, New Yorker, 11/5/01] The existence of these flights during the air travel ban is now usually referred to as an urban legend. [Snopes, 3/19/02]
They're too busy defending the honour of America and the Republican party to actually let the facts speak for themselves which is often more interesting than the the lies being spun from both sides.
I think some of their stuff is biased leftward, depending upon how the editor feels on a particular day or something. The biggest problem is that it's getting dated. I certainly don't see a bias in favor of Republicans or President Bush.
Comments
Perhaps you could elaborate?
What interests me is that despite a great deal of searching, i haven't found anyone doing point-by-point defenses of the charges against Mr. Moore anywhere on the web.
You could take a stab at it, if you like.
there's a reason why logical people don't try to defend the likes of Rush, he's indefensable.
i give the Dems. a month or five before they realize Moore falls into this category.
You'll not find a point-by-point defense as none of the articles deserve anything other than scorn.
He's fat. GUILTY
He's ugly. GUILTY
He edits his films before releasing them. GUILTY
He doesn't agree with the worldview of right-wing columnists. GUILTY
Where are the articles that aren't based on childish ad hominems and fundamentally flawed axioms?
"Documentaries are objective records of reality".
Nope, sorry.
"Actually using your hard-won freedoms is disrespectful to those who fight and die to win them".
That's just *so* wrong.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go watch Roger and Me and cry for the days of yore when Michael Moore wasn't a douchebag.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
...
The one calling his excercising of the right to free speech 'unamerican' was the only one worse than the simple-minded 'expose' of the editing process of documentaries.
...
I don't think anyone is calling "his excercising of the right to free speech 'unamerican'". Rather I think some may be calling his speech unamerican.
Often when some idiot on the left puts their foot in their mouth and they get pounded for it it ... they claim their right to free speech is being taken away. What they want is for others to stop using their right to free speech to criticize them.
Originally posted by Scott
I don't think anyone is calling "his excercising of the right to free speech 'unamerican'".
Maybe you should read the original piece:
http://www.newarkadvocate.com/news/s...n/1259124.html
and then this:
http://www.littlemeanfish.com/blogst...?id=P187_0_1_0
Originally posted by alcimedes
if you have to lie to bring forth these issues, maybe you're doing something wrong....
Somebody ought to be asking questions like that to the people (Bush, Blair, CIA, MI6) who are currently acting in our name.
Seymour Hersh article in the New Yorker
But he's become completely unbearable the past several years.
There's no humor, really, just some rumpled lard-ass going "look at me stick it to The Man...and with made-up ammo, to boot...".
Where's the fun or talent in that? Anyone with an axe to grind, a video camera and iMovie can rival his recent output.
He's Rush without a) the humor b) the eloquence c) the talent d) the audience e) the cultural impact or f) popularity.
I know that just kills some of you, but, as usual, you'll just have to suck it up and deal with it best you can.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
i think your simplifying it, it's about bush 41 and his relationship with the bin laden family as well.
If he can answer the question as to why the only airplane that was allowed to leave US airspace on 9|11 had the Bin Laden family on it I'll be satisfied.
Moore is Moore. He won't change. Now could someone give me the name of that ignorant, blonde, cunt (there is simply no other word for it) who wrote the book "Treason"? Now there's a person who deserves the title "Douchebag".
(A funny, eloquent, talented Rush that is
ok ok.. the movie too.
Originally posted by pscates
I really enjoyed "Roger and Me" when I first saw it years ago. Kinda funny to see such a schlub laying it to those GM and Flint uppercrust types. I laughed out loud many times, but some scenes were very sad and made me sober up quickly (the family getting evicted and all).
But he's become completely unbearable the past several years.
There's no humor, really, just some rumpled lard-ass going "look at me stick it to The Man...and with made-up ammo, to boot...".
Where's the fun or talent in that? Anyone with an axe to grind, a video camera and iMovie can rival his recent output.
He's Rush without a) the humor b) the eloquence c) the talent d) the audience e) the cultural impact or f) popularity.
I know that just kills some of you, but, as usual, you'll just have to suck it up and deal with it best you can.
I think he would make for a nice trash collector. Imagine his fat stinky ugly self on a trash truck that complements his features.
I could even see him eating bits and pieces of what he finds while collecting the trash.
What garbage....
Does he cover your route SPJ? you two could go to lunch and split a rotten banana
Sickening
Fellowship
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
As a matter of fact, he does. Told me about his next documentary... about this fellowship chuch in texas.
Yeah bring it on LOL!!!!
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I think he would make for a nice trash collector. Imagine his fat stinky ugly self on a trash truck that complements his features.
I could even see him eating bits and pieces of what he finds while collecting the trash.
What garbage....
Does he cover your route SPJ? you two could go to lunch and split a rotten banana
Sickening
Fellowship
you MUST be talking about Rush
Originally posted by groverat
He used to be so relevant.
If not exactly "relevant" every time in the past, at least he wasn't being a professional traitor, media whore and closet politician.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
If he can answer the question as to why the only airplane that was allowed to leave US airspace on 9|11 had the Bin Laden family on it I'll be satisfied.
Oh, please post a credible link for this one. I gotta see this.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm
Having said that I no longer rate snopes, as they have been incapable of hiding their biases since 9/11 which is sad for a site that sets out to uncover the reality behind the rumours.
They're too busy defending the honour of America and the Republican party to actually let the facts speak for themselves which is often more interesting than the the lies being spun from both sides.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...n/AAsaudi.html
September 13-19, 2001: Members of bin Laden's family and important Saudis are "driven or flown under FBI supervision to a secret assembly point in Texas and then to Washington from where they left the country on a private charter plane when airports reopened three days after the attacks." The flights to Texas and Washington occur before the national air ban is lifted. [New York Times, 9/30/01] The Tampa Tribune reports that on September 13, Lear jet takes off from Tampa, Florida, carrying a Saudi Arabian prince, the son of the Saudi defense minister Prince Sultan (see August 2001 (G), August 31, 2001, August 15, 2002), as well as the son of a Saudi army commander, and flies to Lexington, Kentucky, where the Saudis own racehorses. They then fly a private 747 out of the country. Multiple 747s with Arabic lettering on their sides are already there, suggesting another secret assembly point. The Tampa flight left from a private Raytheon hangar [Tampa Tribune, 10/5/01] (Raytheon's name keeps coming up in relation to 9/11_(for instance, see September 25, 2001)). Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the US, helps move the bin Laden family out of the US. [London Times, 11/25/02] Ron Motley, the lead lawyer in a 9/11 lawsuit against many Saudi, points to the flights during the air ban as evidence that Saudi are "protected by the Bush administration" because of "oil." [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 8/16/02] There have been conflicting reports as to whether the FBI interviewed these people before they left the country. Osama bin Laden's half brother, Abdullah bin Laden, stated that even a month after 9/11 his only contact with the FBI was a brief phone call . [Boston Globe, 9/21/01, New Yorker, 11/5/01] The existence of these flights during the air travel ban is now usually referred to as an urban legend. [Snopes, 3/19/02]
note references are hyperlinked in the original.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
RE: snopes
They're too busy defending the honour of America and the Republican party to actually let the facts speak for themselves which is often more interesting than the the lies being spun from both sides.
I think some of their stuff is biased leftward, depending upon how the editor feels on a particular day or something. The biggest problem is that it's getting dated. I certainly don't see a bias in favor of Republicans or President Bush.