Who saw F9/11?

[bingoboingo]

What were your impressions?

I hear and read all sorts of things. Some say it was a lot of exaggeration and other say it was accurate. Which is it?

[Liberal Veteran]

1. F what? Never heard of it.

:)

[West Coast Democrat]

2. Accurate--and coming from a point of view the mainstream media...

rarely shows you.

[bingoboingo]

6. Was it rally acurrate?

Did he take liberties with the editing that I'm hearing he took?

Just curious cause I didn't see it yet.

[Liberal Veteran]

10. Go see it without preconceptions.....

Then come back and tell us what you thought or what you might have questioned.

[West Coast Democrat]

12. "liberties with the editing?"

...you mean the way Faux News edits out the flubs in Bush's speeches?

No...Moore shows you the real Bush.

[porphyrian]

15. It has a liberal bias, but it is factual.

It's no more misleading than CNN or Fox News, and I'd say the facts are more solid. The "inaccurate" and "took liberties with the editing" are just neocon memes to be parrotted ad nauseum until they are accepted as fact. They aren't, so don't.

[merh]

37. I'm sorry, I take exception to your equating F911 to faux and cnn.

Moore was factual and portrayed the dems in as bad a light as bushco & his band of rethugs. CNN and Faux never show the clown in chief or his merry men in a bad light.

Moore included his opinions with the footage, but for the most part, the footage spoke for itself.

[Cheswick2.0]

53. go see the movie.

Why haven't you gone to see it yet?

[chiburb]

3. Are you saying "fuck 9/11" ??

What kind of American are you?

[Randers]

4. who hasn't seen F9/11? would be a more appropriate question

around here.

[Bunny]

5. We ALL saw F9/11.

We all agree - it was fantastic, accurate, and just plain beautiful. Did you see it? If not, why?

[bingoboingo]

9. Haven't had the chance.

Wife's been sick for the last three weeks (not sure what's wrong with her and the doctors don't know either) and I had to take care of the kids.

[redqueen]

26. Sorry to hear about your wife

Hope she feels better soon and that you can both go see it together.

I've seen Moore criticized for implying that the Saudi's (including relatives of Bin Laden) who were flown out of the country did so before the flight ban was lifted, but that seems to be the only criticism that's credible so far.

It's very accurate and I hope you get a chance to see it soon and let us know your thoughts.

As for me, I've never seen a movie like it. It was beautiful, because it showed us what the media has been hiding for years now: that Bu$h is incompetent, uncaring, and beholden to his rich base and his Saudi investor friends (close enough to call them family, really).

And welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Goldmund]

44. Well...

"I've seen Moore criticized for implying that the Saudi's (including relatives of Bin Laden) who were flown out of the country did so before the flight ban was lifted, but that seems to be the only criticism that's credible so far."

The thing is, the Saudis were in the air while the flight ban was still on, flying from Florida up North, if I remember correctly. It _is_ true that they weren't flown out of the COUNTRY until after the ban was lifted, but they definitely did fly WITHIN the country while the ban was still on. I guess Moore could have made that more clear, but the main point -- which is that they were given bizarrely preferential treatment while people were dying because their donated organs couldn't arrive in time -- still stands.

[redqueen]

46. Yeah I know

And your point is valid. The one flight from Florida it is true did fly during the flight ban. The implication that they got out of the US is what has merit. If you didn't pay attention and don't know when the ban was lifted, that is, since the film clearly shows the flight date out of the US as 9/13.

The fact that it's only an implication of an untruth that they can point to and whine says a whole lot, don't you think?

[Liberal Veteran]

7. More importantly, What were YOUR impressions?

Nearly everything in the movie was presented as fact with supporting video.

[spanone]

11. Don't take the bait.

[bingoboingo]

14. No bait here

I fully intend on seeing this as soon as I am able. I was just looking for honest opinions.

[Individualist]

18. My suggestion

is to go see it first, then discuss.

[bingoboingo]

Fair enough

[Zen]

65. Loved it - saw it twice already.

Man, I've never seen so many disruptors in one thread - what's up with that? Oh, yeah, them freakpers are feeling the heat - hahaha!

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

13. Welcome to DU smokindrew....

Enjoy your stay.....

:eyes:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[West Coast Democrat]

17. Over 50% of the public DISAPPROVE of Bush

...meaning, a lot more than 10% of the public believe the gov't is against them.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

42. Please don't take undue offense

We've had a spate of trolls coming in to disrupt our forum, and they're not welcome nor allowed to stay if that's their purpose(says so in the rules).

Your post there was a bit on the harsh side, so I don't think this kind of reception was totally unforseeable. Maybe you should temper your statements a wee bit?

Welcome to DU... hope you enjoy your stay.

:hi:

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kahuna]

49. At least you're admitting you're a conservative... Just so you know...

DU is not a place to debate the "virtues" of bush. Otherwise, welcome to DU.

[Cheswick2.0]

56. You need to read the rules

You don't have an automatic right to speak out here. You do have a right to leave if you don't like the rules.

[smokindrew]

What's your stance on Martha Burk and Augusta?

Just curious

:)

[tishaLA]

69. Martha Burke?

Sweety, I know you're gone already...but Martha Burke? When is the last time that was a hot topic? You need to get out more. Or stay in and read more.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

28. lol... 10%?

It is not that people think the government is against them, just the people looting the Treasury to the benefit of Halliburton and Bechtel. Most of the government is trying to do their job of serving the public, criminal members of the bushgang aside.

Just wait till after Nov. 2, my friend. Then you'll see how inaccurate your 10% estimate is.

:hi:

[rbnyc]

34. What?

First, where do you get this 10% figure? Second, are you really comparing the relatively tiny bit of money Moore will make from doing his job to the billions and billions Bush & Co. have made from screwing the public? Also, I just got back from the film and I really don't think Michael Moore was trying to make me feel afraid. I think he was trying to make me feel empowered and armed with the truth.

Sigh. This is a waste of time isn't it?

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

45. Secret Service protection for the Saudi Embassy!

How anyone could not take offense to that is beyond me. Not to mention the war of aggression against a country that never attacked our country nor threatened to.

So many ugly truths for Bush's worshippers to deal with... you can't blame them for freaking out a little. Be glad that at least a few of them are seeing it for themselves. I know too many that are willing to simply accept what some 2-bit hack writes as fact and avoid facing reality altogether.

[Kahuna]

50. Any how many lives has Michael Moore ended or ruined? You can..

hardly compare Moore to bush. If you indeed believe that Moore is a liar, his "lies" haven't cost one life. Unlike bush who is responsible for the death and destruction of thousands because of his lies.

[matcom]

16. Go see the movie - THEN post about it

[Liberal Veteran]

23. Now now, Matcom...is that any way to make the new guy feel welcome?

ROTFLMAO!!!!

Sorry MATCOM...that was supposed to be a reply to your post to the other guy.

[librechik]

20. -go see it yourself & make up your own mind

there was a lot less exaggeration than the average Wolf Blitzer hour on CNN. But you should see it yourself.

[genius]

25. Facts are not an exageration. It is pure documentary. News clips,

news clips, etc. Nothing but facts and actual events. The Republicans just want to change reality and and so they try to discredit the facts with lies.

[Bjornsdotter]

27. I've seen it, now you need to

Hi,

Yes I've seen it, my whole family has....husband and 2 teens.

Now you NEED to go, see it and make up your own mind about what you believe or don't believe.

Cheers,
Kim

[rbnyc]

29. I just got back.

I did cry a lot. I actually started crying right from the start, just at the sight of Condi, Ashcroft, Rummy, Bush*, Cheney. I was overwhelmed by how much I hate these people.

I thought the movie was well done, overall. I honestly think Michael Moore could have been even more damning of the administration. I thought there were things he left out that could have been very powerful. But, I do realize, not everyone is coming to this movie from my perspective.

Anyway, I literally just walked in the door from having seen it, so I do need to absorb it a bit. But after everything I heard, I thought it was a little tame.

EDIT: Just wanted to add, there wasn't anything in the film that I hadn't read credible documentation of already. You have to stretch the truth about this movie in order to say the movie stretched the truth.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

30. There's only been 999,999,999,999 threads on this movie in the last week.

You could have read those threads and gotten 1000x the input you will get on this thread.

And you haven't seen it and post a thread about "are the distortions true?"

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.....

[GreenPartyVoter]

31. Welcome to DU :^) Best thing you can do is

go and see the film for yourself.

[bingoboingo]

32. Plan to

As soon as I get the chance.

[aquart]

33. Welcome to DU.

You have a LOT of reading to do. Pretty much everything in F9/11 was familiar to the people here. We were just waiting for the rest of the country to find out.

No, it wasn't exaggerated. Frighteningly understated, in fact. BushCo corruption is so pervasive, Moore had to leave huge amounts out.

[BattyDem]

36. I already knew about ...

all the "revelations" that were in the movie. Most DUers did, too. We do plenty of research here, which is why we know it's accurate!

Did Moore present the facts? Yes. Did he put a little spin on it? Sure, he's a film maker - he wants people to get emotional so they finally do some thinking. (Sorry about doing that annoying "ask and answer your own question" thing that Rumsfeld does ... but it made my point.)

The movie is made up of newspapers articles, government documents, news video footage and photographs, which are held together with Moore's commentary - but the facts are the facts. If there's something you don't believe, look it up for yourself - Google it - all the information is out there. Many DUers can provide credible links that will support every claim Moore makes in F9/11. As they said in The X-Files, "The truth is out there" - you just have to take a little bit of time to look for it. :-)

[Goldmund]

38. Is that a movie?

Vinny DeVito, right?

[neverborn]

39. It's Moore. Somewhat misleading, but facts are there too.

Not as misleading as Columbine.

[trumad]

41. in what way?

[Kahuna]

55. Moore, speculating about the motives of bushco is no more than...

what the media routinely does to Democrats. At least Moore is upfront that he is "speculating" and not representing his speculations as fact.

[Kahuna]

43. There 's a lot of actual footage of bush. And it's all accurate...

How can it not be? It's him. It's not an evil twin. It's not a cyborg double. It's him in his own shallow, empty, mispronounced words.

[redqueen]

47. You forgot 'mispronounced'

;)

[Kahuna]

52. LOL! I edited the post to include, "mispronounced.."

:hi:

[hertopos]

51. Please read very emotinal reveiw of F911 by Japanese young movie critique

I started my thread but I though posting here may have more chance to expose this 'review'. I spent sometime to translate this.

__________________________________________________________________
I was looking for Japanese links regarding F9-11. Then I find Mr. Machiyama�Ns web diary. He is a well-known young movie critique who is very popular among young generations in Japan. Right now he is in California. Today�Ns entry for his web diary was about his F9-11 experience.

I found it very emotional and powerful. I read in Japanese and it made me cry. I translated the most touching part of his writing. He also interviewed Michael Moore.
If you can read Japanese, here is the link
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/TomoMachi/20040625
I am not quite sure if my translation is good enough to convey his natural tone of voice, which carries intense emotion. I tried.


From his �MHatena Diary�P
�L�L�L�L�L�L�L (First 2/3 are more like recap of the movie.)

Right wingers were hading out flyers when I came out from the movie ( F11)�BIt said �OThis movie�Ns whole purpose is to stop the reelection of Bush.�P
Well, so what!�@That�Ns exactly true. Everybody knows that. Do you thing people are coming to see this movie without realizing that?
TVs and magazines damp a shit load of crap every day.
At least, I go to see the moving by making my own choice!
A movie is not a public broadcasting. There is nothing wrong to reflect the belief of the creator on the movie!!
Well, I actually interviewed Michael Moore in person. Please read the following for the detail.

http://www.eiga.com/special/bowlingfor/02.shtml

I expect to see a shit load of knit pick, so-called, criticism.
�O This particular part is not factual�P �O This is taken out of context.�P
Or, �O This lacks objectivity as a documentary�P
Or, �O This is not fair and balanced�P.

What�Ns the hell?
These guys let terrorists go and attack other country based on a bunch of lies. How dare you ask for �Mfair and balanced movie�P?


There may be some exaggeration and editing.; however, those are all trivial compared to the following two major points the movie makes.

These are what F911 want to tell you.
Bush attacked Iraq which has nothing to do with 911 and lots of Iraqis and Americans are dying
The real terrorists keep terrorizing us and the world meanwhile.


Those two are pure and simple facts.

Right winger are trying to divert your attention since they know they cannot dispute these facts!

At least, it does not make any sense that Bush is allowed to be the president of Unites States when he has the long standing financial tie with the family of Bin
Laden.
If a police let the criminal go because he knew the family, what would you do? We will fire the policeman. It is that simple.

‚»‚à‚»‚àšRŽL‚Æ‚µ‚Ä‚Ìšs�E‚È‚Ç�E‚S‚ �EE�E—B�Übr />I dare ask if it is so important to ask the value of F11 purely from a movie critique point of view.
Michael�Ns life is constantly threatened. But he is trying to stop the killing and the meaningless death. What the point of saying �MOh, it is not very objective�P or �M not balanced�P

Isn�Nt it obvious?
If we let Bush stay, the war will continue and may even spread further. ( Without doing anything to ease the terrorist threats.)
Moore is determined to stop this.
He does not care about so „A called rules and objectivity, or the value of being a good director.

Moore�Ns intention is neither making a great artistic movie or �Mfair and balanced journalism�P�AIt is all about stop Bush and stop the waste of human lives.

He is doing his very best to stop people dying in front of him. Only idiots care about the artistic merit of the movie under the circumstance.

People are dying from this meaningless war while terrorists keep beheading civilians.
I cannot stand those movie critiques who �Monly�N see the movie from its own merit.

A famous old French movie director made a comment about Moore, calling him not a real intellect.
Sounds very French. This guys made a lot of noise during a Vietnam war but his action did not change a thing.
Well, during the Vietnam war, many people tried the same thing but none succeeded

But this time may be different. A small budget movie created by a guy may stop the insanity of the president.

A movie may save hundreds and thousands of lives.
We saw number of anti-war movement by religious leader, thinkers, artists and musicians. However, how many actually stop the war? Well, this time it may happen. You know, I have a feeling it may happen because the right wingers are so afraid of this movie. No movie evoked this much fear from the establishment. A low-budget movie direct may change the destiny of the president of the world most powerful nation and the destiny of the world itself.

This is phenomenal. We feel so powerless in this suffocating world. But Moore showed us something special. He gave us a hope. He showed us that we can actually do something to change awful things happening in this world. He showed us there is something stronger than the power or money or the force.

I want this movie to defeat Bush. I will do everything to help that.

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

Hertopos

[redqueen]

54. Thank you for translating & posting

Best review I've read yet!

:hug:

[calimary]

57. Hi bingoboingo. I saw the movie. I'm a retired journalist. I was on the

air for 25 years. So I understand VERY clearly the mechanisms and motivations that go on in a newsroom. And I know media bias, and how it IS actually possible to move through it and get beyond it.

I have seen the movie. I loved it. It was Michael Moore's interpretation, sure, because it was HIS film. But the clips he used, the video footage, was raw stuff. The only editing of this material was what you've seen for the past (almost) four years, by ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Headline News, and - yes, let's not forget the mutant Pox "News" network.

For example, you may have seen on ANY of those outlets - or their local affiliates - a clip of george bush, in casual clothes, obviously away from the White House, addressing reporters in an impromptu news conference, about how we've got to get these terrorists. Your viewing stopped there, because the editors or news writers/reporters OR THEIR SUPERVISORS cut the tape right there. They did NOT show you the few additional seconds after he made his brief statement, wherein he took a few steps camera-left, hoisted his golf club, and instructed everyone on hand "now, watch this drive." You did not see that because it made him, and the statement he had just completed a few seconds earlier, look trivial. Also, the directive to watch his golf swing, and then the swing itself, was not included because it wasn't part of the nature or content of the designated soundbite. THEY edited it out. Not Michael Moore.

You may also have watched various portions (if not all) of the bush innauguration and assorted accompanying festivities. I'd bet you did NOT see ANY footage whatsoever of rather impressively large crowds along the presidential motorcade route, comprised ENTIRELY of angry bush opponents. They carried protest signs inscribed with such slogans as "Hail to the Thief" - and there were protest signs as far as the eye could see. There were also crowds. LARGE crowds. So large they filled the screen, and spilled into the street. They spilled into the street to such an extent that they LITERALLY, not figuratively, STOPPED THE MOTORCADE. There were crowd control officers all over the place. The car carrying bush was egged. You could also clearly see numerous news camera crews in the midst of it all, trying to get footage of the huge near-riot. Yes, it would be coldly, impartially accurate to call it a near-riot, and a huge near-riot, also. You could clearly see the many boom microphones that the camera or audio people in the news crews were trying to hold aloft, over the heads of the crowd, to get the sound.

Now the question - DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING ANY OF THAT REPORTAGE IN WITH ANY OF THE COVERAGE OF THE BUSH INNAUGURAL? ANY AT ALL? DID YOU SEE ANY CROWD SHOTS? ANY PROTEST SIGNS? WERE THERE ANY MAN-ON-THE-STREET INTERVIEWS? ANY SOUNDBITES? ANY AT ALL? Most, if indeed not all of those who did tune in throughout that day will answer that they saw none of the above. Perhaps some will say they heard some anchorperson, in studio, make a VERY brief, passing reference to "a few" protestors, or "some" protestors, or "a handful" of protestors along the motorcade route. NO OTHER COVERAGE WAS PROVIDED. THEY edited that out. Not Michael Moore.

The movie was filled with such examples.

The only bias in this movie, other than Michael Moore's oft-stated bias AGAINST the completely reprehensible policies of george w. bush, was Michael Moore's bias against the lousy, slipshod, asleep-at-the-wheel, kid-glove, "Monica-esque" treatment of george bush by the media. If the media had been on top of things, or had pursued the truth with bush anywhere near as ferociously as they did with Clinton's "bimbo eruptions," we wouldn't even have to have this conversation now. Nor, possibly, would we even have to be suffering through a bush administration at this point, because he likely would have been tied up in court, or in early retirement of some sort.

Go see the movie. I did. Then, perhaps, you'll be inspired to read up a little more on what this monstrous cabal has shoved down the nation's throats. This very site, DU, is a gold mine of links, resources, and many thoughtful perspectives. You could initiate a lot of your own research attempts from here. Are you up to the challenge?

[rbnyc]

59. That's a really great post.

Thanks.

[hertopos]

61. Yes!!

>>Now the question - DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING ANY OF THAT REPORTAGE IN WITH ANY OF THE COVERAGE OF THE BUSH INNAUGURAL? ANY AT ALL? DID YOU SEE ANY CROWD SHOTS? ANY PROTEST SIGNS? WERE THERE ANY MAN-ON-THE-STREET INTERVIEWS? ANY SOUNDBITES? ANY AT ALL? Most, if indeed not all of those who did tune in throughout that day will answer that they saw none of the above. Perhaps some will say they heard some anchorperson, in studio, make a VERY brief, passing reference to "a few" protestors, or "some" protestors, or "a handful" of protestors along the motorcade route. NO OTHER COVERAGE WAS PROVIDED. THEY edited that out. Not Michael Moore. <<

Yes,

BTW, if you have time, please read the review ( more like personal writing ) by a Japanese young critique which I translated.
I really liked what you wrote.

Hertopos

[calimary]

63. Thanks, rbnyc and hertopos!

I fear sometimes that I get a little boring or tedious when I mention my background, but here I thought it was relevant to the discussion. The Gross Dereliction of Duty (yep, that's about the only way it can accurately be labeled at this point) by the media is MAJORLY to blame for the fix in which this country now finds itself. All bush critics were silenced, demeaned, interrupted, shouted down completely, and demonized, with their patriotism and love for their country seriously questioned - in increasingly vitriolic attacks, especially in the wake of 9/11. We now have many publicly-confirmed instances of White House manipulation, control, and suppression of the media. And the media just stretched its collective self out on the ground and basically responded "and what color would like your doormat to be, mr. president?" Wall-to-wall conservative talk radio viciously and incessantly reinforced this, all along.

Michael Moore simply turned the cameras and microphones around so they pointed back toward the media for a change. What we all saw, and what some of us (especially in venues like DU) already sadly knew, was the truth, and the truth about media bias, and that 24/7 whitewash that was nothing short of a flagrant violation of the public trust. That collective media malpractice is the VERY reason why we still have such large percentages of people who are just sure that Saddam was involved with 9/11.

Many in the media, especially those who've been interviewing Michael Moore, are pissed. They should be pissed at themselves, but they're taking it out on him - heaven forbid they admit their own errors and their own participation in this malpractice, and try to do anything about it. I think they're still hedging their bets, on the assumption that somehow or other the bushies will get back in, in November. Because if that happened, they know they'll be expected to keep bowing, scraping, and towing the line. If the polls turn REALLY lopsided against bush, to the point where it looks as though they're unrecoverable, OR if they get hammered, swamped, and literally DROWNED in viewer/listener/viewer complaints about their bias, they'll respond accordingly. That's because they'll assume that their bread is buttered, MORE, by those who are critical of bush.

Here's a good quote to keep in mind, courtesy a dedicated fellow DUer...

IF YOU REALLY WANT TO DO SOMETHING...make a phone call or send a paper letter. E-mails are quick and cheap and don't carry the weight of a phone call or a PAPER LETTER. Paul Begala says a hundred paper letters would change the direction of a news program. – DUer grasswire, 5/20/04

[Retrograde]

68. C-SPAN vs CNN coverage of the inaugural

"Now the question - DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING ANY OF IN WITH ANY OF THE COVERAGE OF THE BUSH INAUGURAL? ANY AT ALL? DID YOU SEE ANY CROWD SHOTS? ANY PROTEST SIGNS? WERE THERE ANY MAN-ON-THE-STREET INTERVIEWS? ANY SOUND BITES? ANY AT ALL? Most, if indeed not all of those who did tune in throughout that day will answer that they saw none of the above. Perhaps some will say they heard some anchorperson, in studio, make a VERY brief, passing reference to "a few" protesters..."

The C-SPAN coverage on Jan. 20, 2001 showed the protestors: they essentially had a camera follow Bush for the entire trip from the Capitol to the White House. Even showed the eggs hitting the limo.

CNN, on the other hand, just showed that last few feet of the procession - the part packed with Bush supporters.

I also liked the CSPAN coverage of W's most recent UN speech: many delegates seemed to find the ceiling unusually fascinating...

[trof]

58. Here's mine.

My F. 9/11 experience
It was a 120 mile round trip from our home to the Springdale Mall theater in Mobile. and worth every nickel's worth of every gallon of gas. Helen and I caught a 12:30 matinee for $4.50 each. I would have paid triple.

I was a little surprised that they would even show the movie here. Many thanks to Carmike Cinemas. On two screens, no less. The next show started at 1:00.

There were perhaps a couple of dozen people in the theater. They appeared to be mostly middle-aged to retirees. A couple of 20-30 somethings. The sound during the previews was UNBELIEVABLY LOUD. Damn near blew us out of our seats. I was paranoid enough to wonder if this might be calculated to ruin the movie for us. I stepped out to the lobby and spoke to the manager about it. The sound was shortly turned down to an acceptable level. The couple sitting behind us thanked me.

I laughed, I cried. Crying to laughing ratio was about 3 to 1 for me. I get emotional about innocent people dying for no reason.
Innocent people on both sides. So many of our soldiers either have no idea why they're there, or DO know and totally disagree with the bogus "reasons".

This movie has been labeled "propaganda" by some. I would agree. There is true propaganda and false propaganda. I would submit that this falls under the former.

Propaganda: The spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person.
Ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect.

In my humble opinion, Moore nails the Bushitas. I believe everything I saw is backed by fact. I saw no hyperbole or spin.
Helen had to look away during some of the graphic depictions of burned, maimed and dead. I forced myself not to. We need to see this. Even a justified war is an ugly, ugly thing. An unjustified "war" is a criminal abomination of the very worst kind.

At the conclusion, the entire audience stood and applauded. I've never seen this in a movie theater before.
See this film. Please. Even if you have to travel a great distance to do it, do it.

[fryguy]

60. go and see it reagrdless of what you've heard....

since people on both sides of the issue will tell you what they want you to think, therefore its better to see it for yourself and formulate your own opinions.

personally i thought it did a supurb job of explaining the relationships and issues surrounding the members of the current administration and shedding a light on the situations - iraq, the war on terrorism, 9/11 - that the news media has been reluctant to pursue for fear of getting the white house mad at them, or injuring their own interests.

[europeanguest]

62. HELP!! anyone remember misanthrope, the fired radio announcer??

dear all,

sorry, that i am crashing the thread but apparently i haven't posted enough yet to open a thread on my own.

a couple of weeks ago i stumbled over the case of a radio
announcer. he was a poster on DU and, apparently, got fired for reasons related to his activity. some of you might remember the story.

i was wondering whether anyone of you found got the real name of this poster who was posting under the nick 'misanthrope'. maybe he himself is still here under a different nick?

as far as I am aware, the person in question was planned to be on duty the friday former president Ronald Reagan was buried. before that day, the announcer in question posted on DU that he had
been instructed to program a "reflective, respectful piece by an American composer" into each hour of our programming on that friday (his shift was from 10-12). he eventually drew up a rather ironic playlist for that day of 'national observance'. however, he never played it because he got fired on
thursday the 10th of June, i.e. one day before. the freeper had read misanthrope's posting, puzzled the relevant info together, found out the station misanthrope was working for and informed the manager.

from what i read, the station had been informed about the announcer’s
posting activities by a poster from freerepublic.com and decided to fire him because of these activities.

maybe there is a legal case pending and misanthrope has decided not to post here anymore for a while. if that would be the case,
i'd fully understand that he did't think it's wise to comment on the
issue publicly. however, i would very appreciate if anyone of you could simply confirm the real name of the announcer.


why am i looking for him? well, i am freelance journalist who writes occassionally for the online edition of one germany's biggest magazines.
the magazine in question already had some unpleasant experience with freepers some months ago. they 'freeped' a poll asking for an assessment of president's bush performance
thus far (amazingly, one of them checked a German website and was able to read it!). well, they were found out and got ridiculed in an article for that.

i'd like to write a kind of follow-up story about them - i have all the info available except the real name of misanthrope.

to make that clear: I WOULD NOT REVEAL HIS NAME IN THE ARTICLE. however, i need his name as a corroboration for the editor when i try to get the article published.

after two mails by me, misanthrope's station manager has answered that he won't discuss staff matters publicly. that means the story is true. so there. the station is WHIL in Mobile, Alabama and the announcer i am looking for would have had duty on friday from 10 to 12.

is there anyone who could help me? I ABSOLUTELY GUARENTEE ANONYMITY. and, provided i get the article published, freerepublic would get a decent smacking in one of germany's most reputable news mags.

so please click on my icon and mail me.

thanks

[WillyT]

64. I Just Love It When These Tombstone Cowboys Inadvertently Start...

a great thread!!!

Thank you Calimary and the rest, for your thoughtful responses to an otherwise disruptive thread. Ya make us all proud!!!

:bounce::kick::bounce:

[Xipe Totec]

66. F 9/11 Good on points, weak on delivery

While I agree with most of the points Moore made in the movie, I felt at times that he didn't do a good job of getting the point across. I kept asking myself: "If a neoCON saw this film, would he be convinced?" And I had to say, no, he could probably punch some holes on this, or that argument.

The one scene that moved me to tears was the Iraqi grandmother grieving over the destruction of her relatives' homes. "God is Great! God is Great! She shouted. God will punish you for this! And I felt shame and revulsion that this atrocity was done in my name.

God, help us mend this. Help us right this wrong.

[Beaker]

67. Saw it?

I was in it.



that's me above the B in Bush.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Retrograde]

71. The goat book

The whole episode of George and the Goat Book was even more damning than I had expected it to be.

OK, Card comes in and tells him that another plane has just hit the World Trade Center. If he had just sat there I might have given him the benefit of the doubt: ok, he's trying to assimilate what just happened, plan his next move, decide who to mobilize, etc. But no, he reaches for a children's book and flips through it as if he's trying to kill time until someone tells him what to do.

Eeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwww. And then there's that clip of Wolfowitz and the comb...