Updated 8/13/2004: Absolute proof of a Moore deception in F911

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Todd33
With the thousands of claims in the movie, the "proof" that it's all BS boils down to a few little things. So 2% of the movie is BS, the other 98% is pretty powerful.

I watched teh movie, i found most of it to be distorted at best.

Well, considering you still believe in the WMD claim i am not surprised.

I believe that all the worlds intel agencys(including germany and france) thought Iraq had WMD before the war.

Do you also believe that none of those agencies claimed to know but still the US government did make that claim, not only that they were there but they also claimed to know where?

Because i do believe that the only source that wasn't prepared to wait and find out for certain was the US admin.

Let me guess you were prepared to wait another 12 years.

Another 12 years for what? To find what didn't exist? I believe i can wait 12 years NOW and they STILL won't find it.

Or rather, point out where the inspections didn't work and the invasion did to me, which wmd's that were not found before has been found since?

Unfortunatly the inspections were not working. As saddam was still being uncooperative even with 150k troops in kuwait.

Yeah, he didn't want to turn over what he did not have?

Nor did he allow meaningful inspections to occur. This icluded but is not limited to to:
-not allowing scientist to be interviewed
-not allowing instant access to sites
-not showing how materials where disposed of

Yet scientists WERE interviewed, Access to sites WAS granted and the materials that were disposed of were documented by the UN.

Let's be realistic here, the weapons inspectors said he did ok, the US had no time to wait for them to finish as they didn't want a "mushroom cloud" but found nothing, Other nations wanted the inspections to go on until they were done, but the US was in a hurry, i ask myself why.

My theory of that is that if the US had waited until they were done and still found nothing there would be no grounds for an invasion.

In other words, i believe they lied and decieved to get what they set out to do long before the inspectors even returned.

And everything points to me being right about that.

 

[MAW1082]

You can barely even see the date on "moore's doctored article." I don't think Moore was emphasizing the date of the article, simply the content.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Here's the deal. If the issue were such a major issue then why would he have such trouble finding articles that he doesn't need to doctor? It just makes you wonder if any of the other ones were doctored.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
You can barely even see the date on "moore's doctored article." I don't think Moore was emphasizing the date of the article, simply the content.

And the content wasn't represented as a news headline by that paper?

 

[Todd33]

Does anyone know if Moore really did this on purpose? I mean there were plenty of real newspapers to use for this. The guy hires his own fact checkers and outside fact checkers knowing his movie would be picked apart, so why use this headline? Seems strange.

 

[Perknose]

The relentless and well funded efforts of the entire inflammed cadre of right wing attack goons and cranks over all these many weeks since the film's debut and THIS is the best you can come up with? :shocked:

Geez, alchy, don't you feel just the least bit embarrassed?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Perknose
The relentless and well funded efforts of the entire inflammed cadre of right wing attack goons and cranks over all these many weeks since the film's debut and THIS is the best you can come up with? :shocked:

Geez, alchy, don't you feel just the least bit embarrassed?

Ding, add another to the list! I already mentioned why I posted it.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Why would you watch this trash? Better off donating to charity.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Todd33
With the thousands of claims in the movie, the "proof" that it's all BS boils down to a few little things. So 2% of the movie is BS, the other 98% is pretty powerful.

I watched teh movie, i found most of it to be distorted at best.

Well, considering you still believe in the WMD claim i am not surprised.

I believe that all the worlds intel agencys(including germany and france) thought Iraq had WMD before the war.

But The Worlds Intel agencys werent positive enough or felt Imminent Threat enough to jump on in did they. They wanted to wait it out. Let the Inspections work.

Who looks Stupid now, after the fact.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: TheBDB
People have accused the movie of being propaganda and said Moore lied in it. Is this the first "incorrect fact" that has been pointed out?

Not quite it appears. According to this link there are at least 56 more where this came from.

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

 

[Genx87]

Let's be realistic here, the weapons inspectors said he did ok, the US had no time to wait for them to finish as they didn't want a "mushroom cloud" but found nothing, Other nations wanted the inspections to go on until they were done, but the US was in a hurry, i ask myself why.

If they felt it was ok why did it take until the end of May in 2003 for the UN to finally lift the embargo that was put on Iraq due to their WMD programs?

 

[Genx87]

But The Worlds Intel agencys werent positive enough or felt Imminent Threat enough to jump on in did they. They wanted to wait it out. Let the Inspections work.

Who looks Stupid now, after the fact.

Watch UN oil for Food scandel brewing to get a better picture of why they wanted to wait it out.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: TheBDB
People have accused the movie of being propaganda and said Moore lied in it. Is this the first "incorrect fact" that has been pointed out?

Not quite it appears. According to this link there are at least 56 more where this came from.

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

59 now - and I think this one makes 60 (although admittedly I haven't looked at the 56 or 59, I don't really care that much to review every fact or mis-fact in the "documentary")

 

[Genx87]

You should give the article a read when you get a chance. It is an interesting read to say the least.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Well if you're talking about a 'deception', then there's probably more.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Genx87
You should give the article a read when you get a chance. It is an interesting read to say the least.

Well, I'll say this. I know enough about it that in general, Moore uses misstatements, innuendo, and deceptive practices to come down on Bush. This is exactly what he's accused Bush of doing with WMD, which is horribly ironic IMHO. Moore: "You (in my opinion) lied! Therefore I'm going to use the same methods of deception to prove you lied"!

As with most, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I've said before, if Bush just stated "I'm going to go after Iraq simply because it is unfinished business, because it borders Iran, and because I'm going to deliver the middle east a message", that would have been good enough for me. The rest is politics. We've fought wars over much, much less.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Todd33
With the thousands of claims in the movie, the "proof" that it's all BS boils down to a few little things. So 2% of the movie is BS, the other 98% is pretty powerful.

I watched teh movie, i found most of it to be distorted at best.

Well, considering you still believe in the WMD claim i am not surprised.

I believe that all the worlds intel agencys(including germany and france) thought Iraq had WMD before the war.

Do you also believe that none of those agencies claimed to know but still the US government did make that claim, not only that they were there but they also claimed to know where?

Because i do believe that the only source that wasn't prepared to wait and find out for certain was the US admin.

Let me guess you were prepared to wait another 12 years.

Another 12 years for what? To find what didn't exist? I believe i can wait 12 years NOW and they STILL won't find it.

Or rather, point out where the inspections didn't work and the invasion did to me, which wmd's that were not found before has been found since?

Unfortunatly the inspections were not working. As saddam was still being uncooperative even with 150k troops in kuwait.

Yeah, he didn't want to turn over what he did not have?

Nor did he allow meaningful inspections to occur. This icluded but is not limited to to:
-not allowing scientist to be interviewed
-not allowing instant access to sites
-not showing how materials where disposed of

Yet scientists WERE interviewed, Access to sites WAS granted and the materials that were disposed of were documented by the UN.


--1 scientist was interviewed, he was too scared for the interview to be useful.
--There were access problems. Iraqi minder greatly outnumbers the inspectors.
-- No documentation was provided for weapons destruction.



Let's be realistic here, the weapons inspectors said he did ok, the US had no time to wait for them to finish as they didn't want a "mushroom cloud" but found nothing, Other nations wanted the inspections to go on until they were done, but the US was in a hurry, i ask myself why.


Almost a year of inspections that were very similar to past 12 years of games.


My theory of that is that if the US had waited until they were done and still found nothing there would be no grounds for an invasion.


If they would have found nothing and had solid proof of weapons destruction i would agree with you. But they had no such proof of destruction.

 

[preslove]

Absolute proof of decesption would show intent to decieve, which this dose not. Cranky conservative alchemize, try again you bilious bush apologist.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: preslove
Absolute proof of decesption would show intent to decieve, which this dose not. Cranky conservative alchemize, try again you bilious bush apologist.

You mean moving an opinion piece from the opinion section and making it look as if it is front page news isn't deceptive? Weird.

 

[Excelsior]

Dudes, Fahrenheit 9/11 is propoganda, don't you all know that?

 

[DealMonkey]

At the risk of ending up pigeon-holed in Alchie's neat little category system of traitors against the Republic, I thought I'd chime in.

I've been listening to the right hammering Moore over this movie for a while now. Here are my thoughts:

Yes, there are a number of inconsistancies and nitpicky instances that can be construed as a deception, but this very example and a number of others illustrates just how badly the right wants to discredit Moore.

I heard Dave Kopel on some AM station the other day (I think it was the Phil Henry Show) about what a "traitor" Moore is and blah, blah, blah. You know what one of his examples of a "deception" was? He says that Moore claims that Bush was reading "My Pet Goat" with the school kids when it was really a book entitled "Reading Mastery 2," which contains an exercise called "The Pet Goat."

OMFG, Moore is INDEED a traitor! How can we stand by with these outright LIES! He quite CLEARLY misrepresented the name of the book!

And now you see my point. You can nitpick anything to death. And in doing so, you will miss the forest for the trees and the overwhelming message. It's akin to Star Wars geeks lamenting the scene change in which Greedo shoots first, screaming "LUCAS is a F'ing TRAITOR! HOW DARE HE?!?"

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: Todd33
With the thousands of claims in the movie, the "proof" that it's all BS boils down to a few little things. So 2% of the movie is BS, the other 98% is pretty powerful.

Powerful? If i wanted to watch something powerful, I'd watch a rerun of Schindler's List. Even if most of Moore's move is true... the content is used to defame Bush, not to show actual harms or fallacies done by the president.


For example: Bush going on vacation. - Moore makes some commentary and shows us footage of the president relaxing and relaxing and relaxing. What moore is trying to have the audience infer from this footage is that B/c the president is vacationing, he is incompetent. That's just rediculous. If moore presented a case showing that President's performance (let's say based on other presidents in the past who have also vacationed) was directly related to the amount of vacation days he took, then although a weak argument, it would be a legitimate one. The rest of the film uses similar emotional appeal to present its case. Ad Hominems have no place in documentary or objective filmmaking.

oh and please don't misconstrue the following, as I have noticed staunch supporters of Moore doing: Just because I disagree with Moore's film, doesn't mean I agree with Bush's foreign policy, or any other policy for that matter.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

OMFG, Moore is INDEED a traitor! How can we stand by with these outright LIES! He quite CLEARLY misrepresented the name of the book!

How about when he claims that Bush doubles copays for seniors, when in reality IIRC he increased premiums from $8 to $15 for seniors making over $50000 annually? I'm not exactly sure about the exact numbers but it's something to that effect. Kind of changes the situation doesn't it?

This sort of thing occurs at least 20-30 times in the movie.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

OMFG, Moore is INDEED a traitor! How can we stand by with these outright LIES! He quite CLEARLY misrepresented the name of the book!

How about when he claims that Bush doubles copays for seniors, when in reality IIRC he increased premiums from $8 to $15 for seniors making over $50000 annually? I'm not exactly sure about the exact numbers but it's something to that effect. Kind of changes the situation doesn't it?

This sort of thing occurs at least 20-30 times in the movie.

1st of all, how is that NOT doubling copays for seniors? It's exactly that. 2nd of all, where's your link and/or Dave Kopel copy/paste?

 

[T2T III]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

OMFG, Moore is INDEED a traitor! How can we stand by with these outright LIES! He quite CLEARLY misrepresented the name of the book!

How about when he claims that Bush doubles copays for seniors, when in reality IIRC he increased premiums from $8 to $15 for seniors making over $50000 annually? I'm not exactly sure about the exact numbers but it's something to that effect. Kind of changes the situation doesn't it?

This sort of thing occurs at least 20-30 times in the movie.

1st of all, how is that NOT doubling copays for seniors? It's exactly that. 2nd of all, where's your link and/or Dave Kopel copy/paste?

The deception is that it is portrayed as *all* seniors have double co-pays, but, doesn't clarify that only those making over $50K pay the double amount. How many seniors do you know if that are making over $50K? Sure, they exist, but there's not a lot of them.