Fahreneit 9/11 Redux

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Can't resist obscure joke...

Lord

And as Americans, we are the defenders of freedom.

Jeez, I thought Americans were defenders of corrupt dictatorship, as Pinochet in Chile, leaders in Honduras, El Salvador; Diem and his successors in S. Vietnam ca 1960-1975; the Shah of Iran. His successor Khomeini. The house of Saud.

Just out of curiousity, who, in the last 50 years, has the US brought freedom to? A short list will help me focus. (Leave aside the current muddles of Afghanistan and Iraq as too early to tell.)

Utopia. (outopos).

And more from Plato next week at Single Words From Dead Philosophers And You only at Literoica.

 

[doormouse]

(I'm sorry LDW)

Fuck, I'll pay for this comment...

I agree with all of you here about the war.

Most are unnecessary, and the innocent suffer as a consequence.

This started as a thread about the movie. (Sorry again baby) LDW 'helped' turn it in another direction.

I'm here listening to his ramblings via voice on yahoo, and witnessing his views being interpreted by others.

He actually does make a good case, just doesn't seem to be able to put it into words when it's a subject so close to his heart (sorry again baby).

I can't, nor will ever take sides when it's an arguement outside my juristiction(sp?), or knowledge. I'm a foreigner.

LDW, I love you, BUT, I think you have to see things from both sides. I'm an outsider and can see where both sides are coming from. You force your background on these people and expect that to stand against their beliefs. Yes, they have beliefs just as you do. (Fuck I'm gonna pay for this).

I'm running now before i get into more trouble lol

 

[shereads]

Well, you may keep saying that I get the government you deserve. The choice is yours. Vote. Only the people make the difference.

As for comparing me to Amiducs as a runner. I looked at your link. And I did research on it. It's an independent film company with links to the production agencies in the CA. So yes, you're right, above the board this film wasn't financed by Hollywood.

As for Moore being a democrat? I really don't care of his political affiliations. He made nothing more than a political commerical and had the public pay for it.

Shereads, I'm sorry that you feel the way you do about this country. This country, in my opinion, is the best country the world has to offer. It truly is the land of opportunity. People die to come here.

THe one thing we have that most other countries don't is the freedom of speech. No matter how the left attacks me on lit, I have a voice. We can talk about things and not be persecuted. Not by isp, chat nick or telephone number. To this day, many cherish that dream. And as Americans, we are the defenders of freedom.

To change things you have to Vote. You have to make your voice count. It's up to you. And no, I don't run like Amicus. I just don't like to argue. I guess I'm old and bullheaded.

VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Need I remind you that my vote didn't count in the 2000 election. Florida was stolen, by anybody's math. There were enough black voters who ended up "by mistake" on a list of convicted felons purged from the voter rolls (by your candidate's state campaign manager acting in her dual role as Florida Secretary of State) to have given Florida to gore, even without the recount that his brother managed to stop.

I do more than vote. I write my congressmen. I make it my business to know what candidates are about, beyond the spin they put on themselves and sell to the non-existent "liberal media." The liberal media which spent weeks berating Al Gore for a mis-statement during the debates about which person he accompanied to a disaster site, and let GWB walk away scot-free from a blatant lie about the benefit to the poor from his tax cut proposal AND his REPEATED statement that his opponent wanted "to treat Social Security like a federal program."

I've read five books by people in this administration, but I knew what Dick Cheney was about long before the 2000 election. It was there for the world to see: in his dealings with Irag as a director of Halliburton, where he used a loophole to violate this country's sanctions against trade with Iraq; his war agenda was evident when he became signatory to the Project for the New American Century, which is essentially a carefully worded argument in favor of colonizing third-world countries and using their resources, in exchange for granting them an American-style democracy whether they want one or not.

I knew more about the Middle East and its complex mix of cultures and political agendas, from reading the daily newspaper, than this president demonstrated months after taking office. A "crusade?" What kind of moron promises to win the hearts and minds of the Arab world and calls it a crusade?

If you want to believe we're in Iraq for some moral purpose, nothing will dissuade you - not even the half-dozen books by people from inside the administration. You don't want to know. It hurts to know that your government has taken you for a fool, and has spent American lives as casually as they sell shares of stock.

FYI, we HAD freedom of speech before this administration put John Ashcroft in power. Since the advent of the Patriot Act, we're welcome to say or write whatever we want, provided we don't mind the small but real risk of being locked up and held indefinitely without being charged with a crime, on the whim of someone in the Executive Branch who determines that something we say here, or the books we buy at amazon, or our reading patterns at a public library - or my donations to Greenpeace - might indicate that one of us is connected with a group they choose to connect with terrorism.

In my adult life, I never thought there would be a time when I could not take the privacy of my communications and my reading habits and my medical records for granted, as an absolute right, without evidence that would convince a court of law to provide a warrant for search and seizure. In the space of 3 years, using 9/11 as a blanket excuse for virtually anything on their agenda, this administration has taken what were inalienable rights and turned them into privileges which are granted by the Executive Branch and are subject to being revoked.

In the history of this country, no president has worked so hard, and so successfully, to limit speech in opposition to its policies. Remember what Rumsfeld said after Bill Maher lost his TV show? "From now on, people had better watch what they say."

Yes. I got the government you deserved for trusting these people when there was evidence galore that they would work to undermine personal liberty and increase financial liberty; to shift more of the tax burden to the people who can afford it the least; to sacrifice the needs of the powerless in the service of their own greed.
Dick Cheney's $360,000/yr tax cut will not make one iota of difference in his lifestyle, but by God he wanted it!

"We won the mid-terms. This is our due." What kind of statesman says a thing like that when the nation is already experiencing the widest gap between the richest and poorest Americans since the Depression? What kind of president questions a 2nd tax cut "for the rich" (his words, not mine. Quoted in O'Neill's book. He would have published the actual cabinet meeting transcript online for you to read, if Bush/Cheney hadn't stopped its publication in court) and then lets himself be bullied into it by his vice president and a member of his cabinet?

No one that I would vote for. If my vote counted. Efforts have already been underway to assure a GWB victory in my state by whatever means are necessary - The insistence that Deibold voting machines will be used despite the fact that no paper trail is possible in the event that a hacker deletes votes from the system; a recent attempt, exposed by the Miami Herald, to sneak through yet another error-filled purge of the voter rolls, which would have denied 1200 black Floridians the rights they regained when their convictions were overturned.

Your vote will count because your party is in power, and the evidence shows they don't care what they have to do to the democratic process to win. Whatever you do, don't acknowledge the evidence. Just as you persist in believing that Farenheit 9/11 was some subversive act by wealthy liberals (who worked awfully hard to cover their tracks, to the extent that Disney and Miramax exposed themselves to accusations of right-wing favoritism.)

You don't "like" arguing? I hate it. It burns the pit of my stomach. But my side is helpless against the side in power, who are so contemptuous of ethics that they no longer even try to hide the conflicts of interest. This is all my side has. We won't have it four years from now if John Ashcroft has his way. We will be in more danger of terrorism in and outside our own borders, because your president refused to hear the warnings that his war would eliminate the moderate element in the Middle Eastl. We'll watch the Iraqis who survived liberation die in the upcoming Iraqi civil war. The long-term unemployed will lose their homes because Bush/Cheney's record deficit budget could not accommodate an extension of their unemployment benefits, any more than it could accommodate VA hospitals and expanded benefits to military families. Soldiers recalled to duty will serve in foreign wars for a third and fourth time since Afghanistan, so that no one will have to take the political risk of acknowledging the need for a FAIR, impartial draft. We sure as hell aren't going to send the Bush twins to war when we didn't send their dad.

On the upside, you can feel patriotic. We may not have stemmed terror, we may have given up our inalienable rights to free speech and due process under the law, and those of us who aren't wealthy may end up workiing longer hours for less to support the lifestyles of Bush's supporters, but at least we will have brought Freedom of Choice to Iraq. Except for the women, of course, who were better off under Saddam than they are now.

And don't leave this thread on my account. I've had enough of this exercise in futility. Even if the Democrats happen to overcome Bush's ethics-free campaign machine in win in November, too much damage has been done. Your side still wins.

Edited to ask: In what sense did Michael Moore make the public pay for his political commercial? In the FORCED way, that I paid the salaries of Bush's press office when they lied to me?

 

[Edward Teach]

Vote?

I live in North Carolina. I am registered "unafilliated." I am going to vote but it will be an excercise in futility. Bush is going to carry NC.

Bill Cobey is a GOP candidate for Governor. His TV ads say only three things, literally.
1. I am a Christian
2. I am a conservative
3. I am endorsed by Jesse Helms

Ed Broyhill is rinning as a GOP candidate for congress. His ads say only three things.
1. I am a Christian
2. I am a conservative
3. I am endorsed by Jesse Helms

That is all they need to say to get elected. It is sad.

Do not think that such closed minded, follow the church/party thinking is confined to NC. It is nationwide.

The Republican Party has been hijacked by the Christian Right. Today's Republican Party is not the party of your father, let alone of Lincoln.

Ed

 

[dr_mabeuse]

This topic always seems to spiral down into: either you support the war or you’re against our troops. Either you suppost the war or you want to see the terrorists win. Either you support the war or you’re an America-hating communist/fascist traitor.

It’s not like that. There are those of us who think that the war has made America less safe than it was. That it’s made millions of new enemies for the America and made us look bad in the eyes of the world. That it’s painted the USA as an anti-Islamic aggressor. That it will dangerously destabilize what order there is in the middle east. That a big motive for the war was political, to make Bush look like a strong, decisive, “do-something” leader, but that it was a mistake: the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place. Weren't we trying to get Al Qaida?

Time will tell if we’re right. But meanwhile, let’s avoid the “with us or against us” kind of bifurcation into pro-America and anti-America. Because that’s exactly the way this administration is trying to frame this debate, and to fall into that is to fall right into their hands.

---dr.M.

 

[shereads]

deleted

 

[Colleen Thomas]

My roomates went to see the movie. Are in the kitchen talking about it now. I refused to go see it and after a few mintues of ripping them for being gullible they are happy not to be discussing it with me.

I want to thank the people here at the Ah who opened this thread and made me go look up all the inaccuracies and vindictive malaice in the film. You just saved me three hours of being regaled with Moore's creative genius.

-Colly

 

[Pure]

small point colly: whether someone has malice has no bearing on the truth or falsity of what s/he says.

it's a far too easy substitute for argument to comment on the alleged "motives" of an opponent, e.g., "she just wants to make me look bad."

motives are irrelevant to truth.

repeat after me.

PS.

Beyond a bit of confusion over pipeline plans, no one has, in fact, pointed out any false claims of F 9-11. .

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Believe what you want Pure. I don't really give a hoot in hell. I left this discussion long ago to the fan club. I was however saved three hours or more of hearing about it from a pair of bleeding heart liberal democrats and for that I am grateful. I felt the openers of this thread and those who forced me to go look it up including you, deserved a thank you.

No more, no less.

-Colly

 

[shereads]

As a bleeding heart liberal who grew up in an ultra-conservative household, I remain as mystified by the secret conservative code of honor today as I was decades ago during Watergate.

Nixon was "flawed" but worthy of forgiveness.

The journalists who exposed his criminal activity, on the other hand, were traitors.

Bush/Cheney lying to American soldiers about why they were being sent to kill and die, demonstrates that they have some flaws.

Michael Moore, by having the poor taste to be outraged by what they've done, is "malicious."
Conservatism seems to be based on a "shoot the messenger" theory of government. Let's bame the media, let's blame Hollywood, but whatever we do, let's not blame ourselves for having been duped.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

As a bleeding heart liberal who grew up in an ultra-conservative household, I remain as mystified by the secret conservative code of honor today as I was decades ago during Watergate.

Nixon was "flawed" but worthy of forgiveness.

The journalists who exposed his criminal activity, on the other hand, were traitors.

Bush/Cheney lying to American soldiers about why they were being sent to kill and die, demonstrates that they have some flaws.

Michael Moore, by having the poor taste to be outraged by what they've done, is "malicious."
Conservatism seems to be based on a "shoot the messenger" theory of government. Let's bame the media, let's blame Hollywood, but whatever we do, let's not blame ourselves for having been duped.

I'm not trying to rattle cages, I already know where most of you stand. I sincerely felt I owed you a thanks. You saved me from a long political discussion with people who don't know a tenth of what you all do. I was saved from that disscussion because you all made me go research this movie to a point where I could shut them up.

I did so and have been left in blissful peace to write porn and for that I thank you.

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Colly, I accept your gratitude with glee, and am happy you've been left in peace.

Perdita

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly, I accept your gratitude with glee, and am happy you've been left in peace.

Perdita

I really appreciate it Dita. I love my roomie, but she is not someone I can have a serious debate with & her two freinds are even worse. They all three get the list of approved candiates from the union and that's whom they vote for. Mel at least can be reasoned with and has some opinons but she gets around those two and it's the three of them spouting themost simplistic positions to complex questions and having hissys fits when I tell them they are wrong. Since I still had the MM stuff book marked a couple of quick googles earned me blissful solitude

-Colly.

 

[shereads]

Rattled? Don't be silly. "Malice" and "bleeding heart" are words that I like having associated with my political views.

"Bleeding heart" is apparently meant as an insult to liberals, in that it implies that we get emotional about things that should be viewed from a purely practical perspective, like poverty, racism, and the abuse of power for self-enrichment. If we had a more practical nature, we'd save our emotions for things that count, like paying taxes.

"Malice" as used here seems to describe someone who's such a bleeding heart, he gets all upset and bad-tempered over a disastrous war and the reasons behind it.

If the two sides of American politics are to be divided into those of who think it's malicious to bring the world to the brink of disaster for selfish purposes, and those who think it's malicious to put the story on film with rude comments, I'm grateful to be on my side.

I'm just sorry that even if we win this time, it's too late to undo the damage. I wish there had been a few Michael Moore films BEFORE Shock & Awe.

 

[cloudy]

Do any of y'all (Perdita excepted) realize how rude you've just been to Colly?

She was sincere in thanking you, and it was turned into another reason for debate. She has been unfailingly reasonable, even when disagreeing. Has it come to the point where you just see who's posting, but don't actually read what they say?

 

[Pure]

cloudy said,

//Do any of y'all (Perdita excepted) realize how rude you've just been to Colly?

She[CT] has been unfailingly reasonable, even when disagreeing. //

I don't see that contrast at all. If by reasonable, you mean, polite and explaining reasons, that's true of most folks in the thread. Including Collly.

I'm not sure why a conservative's 'reasonableness' deserves some kind of special recognition, and why those who critique, who post few hearts, become 'rude' or, by implication, 'unreasonable.'

Colly's 'hanging in' to talk calmly to those who disagree--persistence, coolness, courage, and articulateness; however you want to label it-- is virtue, no doubt. But not one that makes her more 'reasonable' or more 'polite' or less 'rude' than others.

Is this going to be another thread where 'sensitivity' is the topic, rather than any substance?

 

[cloudy]

cloudy said,

//Do any of y'all (Perdita excepted) realize how rude you've just been to Colly?

She[CT] has been unfailingly reasonable, even when disagreeing. //

I don't see that contrast at all. If by reasonable, you mean, polite and explaining reasons, that's true of most folks in the thread. Including Collly.

I'm not sure why a conservative's 'reasonableness' deserves some kind of special recognition, and why those who critique, who post few hearts, become 'rude' or, by implication, 'unreasonable.'

Colly's 'hanging in' to talk calmly to those who disagree--persistence, coolness, courage, and articulateness; however you want to label it-- is virtue, no doubt. But not one that makes her more 'reasonable' or more 'polite' or less 'rude' than others.

Is this going to be another thread where 'sensitivity' is the topic, rather than any substance?

She sincerely said thank you, and everyone debated her reasons for doing so. Much like you're trying to stir my response into another debate.

Sheesh....

 

[Pure]

and the debate about Bush, 9-11, Farenheit 9-11 is over, right?

 

[cloudy]

and the debate about Bush, 9-11, Farenheit 9-11 is over, right?

For me it is. I just wanted to point out something that I thought was rude, all politics aside.

Carry on with your worship of Michael Moore. I'm out.

 

[cantdog]

Re: Vote?

I live in North Carolina. I am registered "unafilliated." I am going to vote but it will be an excercise in futility. Bush is going to carry NC.

It sure won't be the Greens, the Libertarians, or the Naderites. NC has an entirely unconstitutional law which makes any vote outside the two major parties illegal and invalidates the whole ballot if you do it. That law was rushed in before the 2000 election.

Bill Cobey is a GOP candidate for Governor. His TV ads say only three things, literally.
1. I am a Christian
2. I am a conservative
3. I am endorsed by Jesse Helms

Ed Broyhill is rinning as a GOP candidate for congress. His ads say only three things.
1. I am a Christian
2. I am a conservative
3. I am endorsed by Jesse Helms

That is all they need to say to get elected. It is sad.

Do not think that such closed minded, follow the church/party thinking is confined to NC. It is nationwide.

The Republican Party has been hijacked by the Christian Right. Today's Republican Party is not the party of your father, let alone of Lincoln.

Ed

Then voting is indeed sad in NC. But I am not a Christian. I am a conservative. I sneer at Jesse Helms. If this country turns into a Christian-Right moronocracy, I guess there'll have to be some things done outside the ballot box.

No fizz-headed pack of Bible idolaters is going to run my life no matter how many live outside of NC, no matter how much they lie, no matter how much they steal, no matter how many window-peepers they hire to surveil us all, and no matter how many secret police and torture chambers they put in place.

NC people may support torture and totalitarian state power if they like, but I am not going to tolerate it. Nor the false followers of Jesus who promote it.

 

[Pure]

cloudy

Carry on with your worship of Michael Moore. I'm out.

Cheap shot. The last review (al jazeera) I posted was critical of a key hypothesis of Moore's. {Added: I'd remind you that this thread started with a fairly critical review of F 9-11 by mabeuse.}

What do people think of Moore's half assed suggestion that the US {{added, "army"}}should have gone into Afghanistan much earlier (iirc, he said that the US waited two months), with many more soldiers?

{added summary and documentation}
Just to refresh my memory, I dug up the following dates: In essence, US bombing, including al qaeda camps, began early in Oct. US proxies did most of the fighting against the Taliban, till end of November, *and were highly successful in taking several major cities. US airplanes attacked the al qaeda 'last refuge' in Tora Bora, early mid November; some small US 'special forces' contingent was involved. US army went in late November, about 10 weeks after 9-11, more of less as Moore says.

{wikipedia}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._invasion_of_Afghanistan

Before October 7, there were reports that U.S. and British special-forces soldiers were covertly landed in Afghanistan at some time after September 11, presumably for reconnaissance purposes, and that several of these troops were captured by the Taliban. As of October 1, all such reports had been officially denied by the U.S., British, and Afghani governments.

At approximately 16:30 UTC (12:30 EDT, 17:00 local time) on Sunday October 7, 2001, US and British forces began an aerial bombing campaign targeting Taliban forces and Al-Qaida. [...]

[Oct]Bombers operating at high altitudes well out of range of anti-aircraft fire began bombarding al-Qaeda training camps and Taliban air defenses. Around 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles were also used. The strikes initially focused on the area in and around the cities of Kabul, Jalalabad, and Kandahar. Within a few days, most al-Qaeda training sites had been severely damaged and the Taliban's air defenses had been destroyed. [...]


[Northern Alliance forces did much of the fighting, capturing Kabul]

[...]
Meanwhile, al-Qaeda's infrastructure around the country had been decimated by the bombing campaign and their backers were being swept from power. However, by November 13, al-Qaeda forces, almost certainly with Osama bin Laden himself, had regrouped and were concentrating their forces in the Tora Bora cave complex, 30 miles southeast of Jalalabad, to prepare for a stand against the anti-Taliban and American forces. Nearly 2000 al-Qaeda fighters fortified themselves in positions within bunkers and caves, and by November 16, U.S bombers began stepped up pummeling of the mountain fortress. Around the same time, CIA and Special Forces operatives were already at work in the area, enlisting and paying local warlords to join the fight and planning an attack on the al-Qaeda base.


By the end of November, Kandahar, the movement's birthplace, was the last remaining Taliban stronghold and was coming under increasing pressure. Nearly 3,000 tribal fighters, led by Hamid Karzai, a westernized and polished loyalist of the former Afghan king, and Gul Agha, the governor of Kandahar before the Taliban seized power, put pressure on Taliban forces from the east and cut off the northern Taliban supply lines to Kandahar. The threat of the Northern Alliance loomed in the north and northeast. Meanwhile, the first significant U.S combat troops had arrived. Nearly 1,000 Marines, ferried in by Chinook helicopters, set up a forward operating base in the desert south of Kandahar on November 25.
==============

{Pure:}What strikes me now reading the account is the extreme focus on the Taliban (a more or less legitimate government)**, and in the initial period, relying on air strikes to do in both groups, Taliban and al queda, without US regular-army ground forces.

This seems like an error (for al qaeda--if it had 'camps'), and may be what Moore, rather unclearly, is referring to.

------
**MORE legitimate than the Northern Alliance, US sponsored and protected group, at any rate.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

cloudy

Carry on with your worship of Michael Moore. I'm out.

Cheap shot. The last review (al jazeera) I posted was critical of a key hypothesis of Moore's.

What do people think of Moore's half assed suggestion that the US should have gone into Afghanistan much earlier (iirc, he said that the US waited two months), with many more soldiers?

Pure,

Come on. Cloudy wasn't speaking on the movie, she was talking about something entirely different. Colly's post plainly said that the people here knew much more of what they were talking about than her roommate's friends and she has repeatedly criticized this administration in her own way even though she has no desire to view the film for whatever reason.

The mention of bleeding hearts was directed at people outside of Lit entirely. And yet some here took her post and lumped themselves into that group, based solely on the fact that they too found merit in the film. I thought it was fairly obvious that she wasn't claiming any level of ignorance or malice existed in people here, but was present in those discussing the film in her kitchen.

Political bile has a habit of causing passionate people to jump to conclusions or take offense where none was intended. Misunderstanding, but still hurtful.

~lucky

 

[doormouse]

doormouse passes around the cheese platter and peace pipe.

Roses for all the ladies

(now I really want to see this movie)

 

[Lord DragonsWing]

Sorry I haven't responded to any of the responses to my last email. I've been working and have not had the time or inclination. I should of listened to an old friend and learned not to discuss politics or religion. What I said are my feelings and I apologize if you don't believe in them.
As for the one in NC who thinks his vote doesn't count. Well, I feel sorry. Every vote does count. Unless you leave a chad hanging of course. Then we need a recount.

 

[Pure]

Jeez, Lord wakes from his snooze in the ole' Republican rocking chair and delivers an opinion-- with no evidence as usual. Dozes off again; all's right in his dream world.

Tell me Lord, on election day, for President, why should Democrats vote in Republican stronghold states (like Mississippi) ---let's say, those states have been polled to confirm this, just prior to election. *Under the electoral system, state by state, these votes simply go down the drain.