It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Micheal Moore's SICKO gets *Thumbs Up* from fact checkers.

page: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
and i don't want to hear that nonsense about 'overpopulation' when this world has been producing enough food for everyone since the 70's despite the best efforts of the west to destroy the worlds poor farmers chance to make a living of their own produce by flooding the world with very cheap food that can be used for political ends by central governments everywhere.


Again, Stellar wants to blame the U.S., or the west, for what happens in the world...

Cheaper products means even the poor people can afford to buy food and other products.

If the markets where flooded with expensive products the poor people would suffer more, since they wouldn't be able to afford food, or other necessities, or they will have to make choices like the regular people in Cuba have to do...either you buy a small bar of soap, or a toothpase (both made with the cheapest and worse products) for the month....now choose... Oh, and don't forget you probably don't have a toothpaste, so you have to use your finger, or a piece of cloth to clean your teeth...

Competition means that there will always be cheap products which then the poor will be able to afford.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Muaddib]




posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

One TRILLION dollars per year is spent on dominating the rest of the globe.


First of all, for 2007 the U.S. is spending 626 billion, so we are not spending a trillion dollars.

www.globalissues.org...

Second of all the U.S. is upfront with military spending, but the same cannot be said of other countries such as China, and we at least know that they have increased at least 165% of their military expending since 1995, while the U.S. has increased 50% it's military spending.

Third of all, the united States does not "dominate the rest of the world"...



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Um, what did he lie about?


I already mentioned what he lied about... the NHS in Cuba is not the stunt he perpetrated with the Communist regime of Cuba...appart from the fact that he decided to leave out the problems that countries with NHS are having as we speak....



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
If it wasn't for the blue sky military budgets and 100 years of unconstitutional taxation to support it, and to weaken the public (domestic imperialism) Moore wouldn't have to have made that film because it wouldn't even be a significant issue.


B.S., people like Moore always try to find one or another reason to make money and get their 5 minutes of fame, even if it means lying, which people like yourself seem to want to accept nomatter what....



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
They do take care of their people better pretty much everywhere else but here... and who said that our corrupt and illegitimate system isn't in fact a de facto dictatorship (even before Dubya)??


That's a very ignorant statement to make....more so when "cuba is a dictatorship"...most Cubans, and more so professionals can't leave the island, there is no freedom of speech, and you don't see any real Cubans living in the island posting in these forums do you?.... only those who have been able to leave, and go to places like the United States can post in forums such as this one....wonder why since apparenlty you, Moore and some others seems to claim it is wonderful over there and the united States can learn from such a Communist dictatorship....


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Sounds like the same kind of socialism Moore is talking about.


not really... Moore is apparently, and as some have claimed, tried to propose that the United States can learn from a true dictatorship....

in fact by Moore being in cahoots with the Communist regime in Cuba Moore seems to want such a Communist regime in the United States...


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Look at the national debt ($NINE TRILLION$), and the trillion dollars per year spent on the military to undermine global democracy, and then please try to justify the unconstitutional taxation that occurs. By definition that debt is slavery. You're literally justifying your own enslavement, and the domination and suffering of virtually the entire globe.


First of all, the U.S. has not spent a trillion dollars a year in military spending.......

Second of all, there are several countries who spent billions on trying to undermine countries like the United States, so they can set up dictatorships such as in Cuba in other countries... but i guess someone like yourself would justify such countries trying to undermine the west, and the U.S., but such people want to whine when the U.S. does the same, as for example trying to stop regimes like Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons which such regime has stated time and again they want the destruction of Israel...

I am justifying my enslavement, and the enslavement of the world?... lol... No kid, I am proving that people like yourself are more than willing to actually believe lies and accept the lies from a real dictatorship...

If you live in the United States, you have a million more priviledges than any of the regular Cubans living in Cuba....and Moore lies are not going to change that...



[edit on 27-7-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Ouch. Looks like CNN has done a very bad thing.

Shame.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
First of all, for 2007 the U.S. is spending 626 billion, so we are not spending a trillion dollars.
www.globalissues.org...


That's funny I counted over $700B, as the initial pricetag. Then there's black-budgets, $400 toilet seats & $280 hammers (etc), Homeland Security, NSF and other items from the "Physical Resources" sector and so on. The black budgets alone probably take it well beyond $1T.
www.warresisters.org...
Then you have to consider that the entire system is wrapped around the military industrial complex, US being the imperialist permanent war economy that it is. That's what the machine is, and when that's the case there's going to be enormous costs beyond the upfront military pricetag ingrained throughout the entire system.



Second of all the U.S. is upfront with military spending, but the same cannot be said of other countries such as China, and we at least know that they have increased at least 165% of their military expending since 1995, while the U.S. has increased 50% it's military spending.


So is that "defense", or Offense. The increase percentages are red herrings. The fact is the US has always had the uppermost spending for overlapping generation minus a few years out of 45+ that the USSR might have managed to pull a. by a handful of digits.


Third of all, the united States does not "dominate the rest of the world"...


No?
Over 700 military bases in over 100 nations.
www.alternet.org...
Troops in 159 of 193 total world nations.
www.lewrockwell.com...
What empire?
Global Dollar hegemony coupled with military, economic, political and even cultural imperialism on a global scale.
What empire?
Rigging elections (Latin America), overthrowing governments (Iran 1951), installing military dictatorships (Saddam), supporting harsh and even totalitarian regimes (worldwide, world wide for all of these actually), and so on.
What empire?
And people wonder why there are "terrorists" 'out there'? Military spending leads to an ongoing need for more military spending, and it's been that way for over 60 years. And then when "they" just so happen to come up with some new medical discovery or whatever the military is praised for the development, as if we wouldn't get the same breakthru's if all the military spending was instead on the betterment of humanity.
America's death toll on the world: 27000000++
What empire?


the NHS in Cuba is not the stunt he perpetrated with the Communist regime of Cuba...


If that's true that important info and I'd like to see the data.



appart from the fact that he decided to leave out the problems that countries with NHS are having as we speak....


Well he seemed to have debunked most of the claims about the drawbacks, and he basically left out the 50M Americans who don't have health insurance. He mentioned them but the focus was about the people who are paying their lives away and get crapped on.




Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
If it wasn't for the blue sky military budgets and 100 years of unconstitutional taxation to support it...


B.S., people like Moore always try to find one or another reason to make money and get their 5 minutes of fame, even if it means lying, which people like yourself seem to want to accept nomatter what....


Ok, try this angle, if it wasn't for etc, Moore wouldn't have much use in making a film about health care because there'd be no money in it.

But following your logic lets just not even watch documentaries/propaganda or even TV or news etc anymore because somebody is making money on it. Do you watch cable news?



That's a very ignorant statement to make....


That was a little hasty. I really shouldn't even be spending time on this issue, but at least I get some empire talk out of it. I meant in terms of healthcare.


more so when "cuba is a dictatorship"...


What sad with places like Cuba and Venezuela is that you really have to wonder what sort of motives the characters initially intended or were at least initially justified with. For example the US has had it's hand in Latin / South American politics for over 100 years. The US has had a habit of controlling the politics there, including the use of brute force when they cant be controlled. So it brings this scenario where they initially feel the need to preserve their power because they know the next batch will be controlled puppets. Then they become the creature, they get used to it. Now these are the dictators that became dictators after 'rebelling' from their US masters because they were sick of seeing their people squandered. Most dictatorships throughout that region have been supported and even implanted by the US Establishment. This is all basic history really but if you really need a history lesson...



there is no freedom of speech, and you don't see any real Cubans living in the island posting in these forums do you?....


I'm not patting these dictator types on the back, I'm here for context. What i will say is that they're actually more honest about it, being the nature of their systems and the truth behind their reality. Here it's a big ongoing web of lies and deceit at even the most basic level. Sure we can come on here and 'complain', etc, but we're also added to the "terrorist" list and we're all marginalized with our de facto fascist Establishment Media, you know the same ones you spoon-fed you your right-wing ideology and these talking points. We have no voice, as it stands. We yell at the TV set and go to bed, just as we've been trained. I guess that's better than a boot to the . for protesting? Oh, wait, if you protest here (challenge the idea that we're actually not free... just so long as we don't challenge it) you might actually get a boot to the . if you step outside the "Freespeech Zone" or show up without a "Permit" (permission = not a right).


wonder why since apparenlty you, Moore and some others seems to claim it is wonderful over there and the united States can learn from such a Communist dictatorship....


Overlapping fallacies in that brief statement which was dripping with political bias: I'm not even really supporting Moore directly, however my view contradicts yours nonetheless so therefore I'm a Moore supporting Liberal. Also for contradicting your view I must support the entire policies or regimes of whoever I try to put into context or support one of their policies (this same fallacy applies to your next statements about Moore).
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Everything I've said so far takes care of the rest of your post.


[edit on 27-7-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
That's funny I counted over $700B, as the initial pricetag. Then there's black-budgets, $400 toilet seats & $280 hammers (etc), Homeland Security, NSF and other items from the "Physical Resources" sector and so on. The black budgets alone probably take it well beyond $1T.
www.warresisters.org...


Well, first of all sorry but i don't believe one word from websites with names like "war resisters"... They never show where they get their "magical figures", all they do is make claims...

As for your claim on the $400 toilet seat, and the $280 hammers, that apparently you and some others claim still happen, perhaps you should be updating your information instead of relying from "a quote from the sci-fi movie Independence Day"....

Here is the whole story behind such claims.


In 2004 Senator Chuck Grassley (R Iowa) said: "I exposed the spending scandal in the ‘80s when federal bureaucrats saw no problem in spending $600 for a toilet seat . . .". Some now claim that neither that nor his also famous revelation of the Pentagon spending $400 for a hammer actually ever happened. Others say the prices paid were fair and justifiable.

The $600 dollar toilet seat was determined to be "fair and reasonable" by a Naval Contracting Officer, based on his detailed knowledge of the manufacturing processes and degree of effort known to be required from the vendor, to manufacture this item.

The United States military services are often in the position of making equipment last decades longer than originally designed. For example the B-52 bomber is more than 50 years old and expected to be useful for another 20 years. The famous toilet seat came about when about twenty Navy planes had to be rebuilt to extend their service life. The onboard toilets required a uniquely shaped fiberglass piece that had to satisfy specifications for the vibration resistance, weight, and durability. The molds had to be specially made as it had been decades since the planes original production. The price of the "seats" reflected the design work and the cost of the equipment to manufacture them.

The problem arose because the top level drawing for the toilet assembly referred to the part being purchased as a "Toilet Seat" instead of its proper nomenclature of "Shroud". The Navy had made a conscious decision at the time, not to pay the OEM of the aircraft the thousands of dollars it would take to update their top level drawing in order to fix this mistake in nomenclature.

Later some unknown Senate staffer combing lists of military purchases for the Golden Fleece Awards found "Toilet Seat - $600" and trumpeted it to the news media as an example of "government waste." The Senate then wrote into the appropriations bill that this item would not be purchased for anything more than $140.00. The shroud has never been purchased since, as no one can make the shroud at that price.

President Reagan had actually held a televised news conference, where he held up one of these shrouds. During the press conference, he explained the true story. The media of the time, and still today, incorrectly reports that the Pentagon was paying $640.00 for a $12.00 toilet seat.

en.wikipedia.org...

Anyways, i shouldn't be too surprised about "people quoting from sci-fi movies and claiming they are true"......about two days ago I was talking to someone I had just met and he was swearing to me up and down that "medichlorians" exist, and they are the stuff which give power to the universe.... When i tried to explain that word was a concept made up for Star Wars he just kept swearing they exist.... Some people believe whatever they want to believe, even if it makes no sense at all, and even if it is not true...


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Then you have to consider that the entire system is wrapped around the military industrial complex, US being the imperialist permanent war economy that it is. That's what the machine is, and when that's the case there's going to be enormous costs beyond the upfront military pricetag ingrained throughout the entire system.


First of all most that is built for the military is being done so by military contractors, or businesses outside of the military which provide the military with services and or products.... You are not talking about "China" where there is a real "military industrial complex" which has total control.

BTW, the whole quote which President Eisenhower made during his farewell address was about the military-industrial-congressional complex obtaining too much power.... Congressional leaders requested that the president remove the word "congressional", and he did.

Anyways, Eisenhower in his farewell speech stated that the country needed such a system to deter our enemies, but he was warning against the system becoming too powerful. IMO he was warning against the system becoming as powerful as the Chinese military complex, which has total power over most if not all infraestructure in China. It would do you good to actually read what he said btw...



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No?
Over 700 military bases in over 100 nations.
www.alternet.org...
Troops in 159 of 193 total world nations.


U.S. military bases around the world are based uponagreements made with other nations.... The only exception is the Guantanamo base in Cuba, and if you would know a little bit of history you would know the reason why that base still exists in Cuba...

BTW, perhaps you are not aware that allies of ours train in many U.S. military bases, including in the U.S..... Does that mean our allies are "empires in control of the U.S."?....



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
If that's true that important info and I'd like to see the data.


That is more true than the lies from a fat rich asshole who is pulling your chains with lies.

I was born in Cuba, lived there and have family there... i have given dozens of links to corroborate my statements, and even DGtempe would corroborate what i am saying. Perhaps you "should keep up with the discussion".



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Well he seemed to have debunked most of the claims about the drawbacks, and he basically left out the 50M Americans who don't have health insurance. He mentioned them but the focus was about the people who are paying their lives away and get crapped on.


He debunked such claims by lying more?... I gave three or four examples from countries like England, Italy and France, if I remember correctly, and they are reporting to have problems finding money and their NHS are in "crisis"... But i guess the information from those countries is wrong, and it is Moore who is right...


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Ok, try this angle, if it wasn't for etc, Moore wouldn't have much use in making a film about health care because there'd be no money in it.

But following your logic lets just not even watch documentaries/propaganda or even TV or news etc anymore because somebody is making money on it. Do you watch cable news?


i never said "not to watch anything"... i just have a problem with someone like Moore making up lies and apparently claiming "we can learn from the Communist regime in Cuba"...and some people in these same forums have even stated this... Yeah....let's learn from a dictatorship....


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
That was a little hasty. I really shouldn't even be spending time on this issue, but at least I get some empire talk out of it. I meant in terms of healthcare.


And what is your extensive knowledge of the Cuban healthcare system?



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
What sad with places like Cuba and Venezuela is that you really have to wonder what sort of motives the characters initially intended or were at least initially justified with.


As always and for some reason some people try to find an excuse to condone dictators such as castro...


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I'm not patting these dictator types on the back, I'm here for context. What i will say is that they're actually more honest about it, being the nature of their systems and the truth behind their reality.


HEH?.... dictators who are trying to make the world believe their systems are what is going to save the world meanwhile they oppress their people are "honest"?....


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Overlapping fallacies in that brief statement which was dripping with political bias: I'm not even really supporting Moore directly, however my view contradicts yours nonetheless so therefore I'm a Moore supporting Liberal. Also for contradicting your view I must support the entire policies or regimes.


You have tried to condone dictators such as castro, from your own words as can be read in your above statements, and then try to claim it is the fault of the U.S. for all of this to happen, but i guess those statements of yours are not "overlapping fallacies dripping with political bias", and exagerations.....



[edit on 29-7-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
And people wonder why there are "terrorists" 'out there'? Military spending leads to an ongoing need for more military spending, and it's been that way for over 60 years. And then when "they" just so happen to come up with some new medical discovery or whatever the military is praised for the development, as if we wouldn't get the same breakthru's if all the military spending was instead on the betterment of humanity.
America's death toll on the world: 27000000++
What empire?


I see that you learnt a lot from Moore as you yourself resort to exagerations and lies...

In that ATS link you gave you claim the U.S. is guilty for some crimes which other regimes committed....such as the government of Pot Pol was a Communist system which caused the death of about 2 million Camboians...yet you claim it was all the fault of the U.S......

Then of course you make other claims such as "the U.S. installed Saddam"... when doing some real research would show the fact that it was General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr who put Saddam in power and not the U.S.... Of course you also leave out some other facts such as it was European countries which armed Saddam....

It was Germany, and not the U.S., which gave the tons of nerve gas and other chemicals which were used extensively by Saddam...


Iraqi Scientist Reports on German, Other Help for Iraq Chemical Weapons Program
Al Zaman (London)
December 1, 2003
Article by Dr Khalil Ibrahim Al Isa, a nuclear science researcher, in Paris: Fresh information on the Iraqi chemical program; Iraqi money and German brains cooperated in building chemical weapons

(FBIS Translated Text)

Historically, the Germans have been the uncontested masters in the discovery, production, and development of lethal poison gases used in warfare, such as mustard gas that is identified by the chemical compound symbol of C1Ch2-Ch2-S-Ch2-Ch2CI. This gas was discovered by German scientists and was first used in 1917. There is also the nerve gas Tabun that was discovered in 1937 by the German scientist G-Farden. Later, a similar gaseous chemical compound called the nerve gas Sarin was discovered. These two gases are highly effective in totally paralyzing muscle movement. In other words, the nervous system is totally paralyzed and this paralysis leads to involuntary bowel movements that ultimately lead to the death of the victim within minutes. German scientists also discovered cyanide acid, which is a more complex chemical compound. It contains the compound Zyklon-B that was used as a weapon of annihilation in Auschwitz. During the First World War of 1914-1918, the gases used by the Germans led to the death of one million British and French soldiers. The horrific scenes of the victims drove world public opinion to impose stringent checks on the conduct of warfare in the protocol that was issued in 1925. This was the first international document that banned warring countries from using chemical and biological weapons, which were considered to be weapons of mass destruction during wartime. Unfortunately, the protocol did not stop countries from conducting scientific research and tests in this field.

www.fas.org...


As for your earlier claim that apparently and according to you terrorism exists because of the United States.... Islamic extremism has existed for over 1,400 years.....well before the U.S. even existed.... But i am sure you or some others will find some other ways to try to claim "terrorism exists because of the U.S.".....


[edit on 28-7-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
The thing I don't get about people who hate Michael Moore and hate this film is that to me he is only talking about making things BETTER for Americans. Improving life, etc.


Sure. In theory.

But lies, disinformation, is never for the good of the people.

He has used false information in past documentaries, hence the red flags.

Just because someone chooses a topic matter that is 'about' bettering American society, doesn't automatically, necessarily, mean the documentary is good stuff
Dishonesty doesn't help me no bit


That said, I have not seen this film yet, when I do I will no doubt come back to ATS to see how many people are really giving all the facts a
's up

[edit on 29-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger

He has used false information in past documentaries, hence the red flags.

Just because someone chooses a topic matter that is 'about' bettering American society, doesn't automatically, necessarily, mean the documentary is good stuff
Dishonesty doesn't help me no bit


Which is the whole point i am trying to make too. You can't bring out the problems of the U.S. healthcare system by being in cahoots with a Communist regime who is repressive, and by leaving out information about the problems going on as we speak in countries using a NHS....



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Hey, I hadn't noticed you responded to this thread.


Originally posted by Muaddib
Well, first of all sorry but i don't believe one word from websites with names like "war resisters"... They never show where they get their "magical figures", all they do is make claims...


Of course, it paints a picture that rubs up against your fantasy world, so therefore completely reject it instead of dispute the key parts that are in your face. Be sure to read that political bias article (again?), it turns out the phenomenon there applies to many other realms in human info analysis and self-deceit.




As for your claim on the $400 toilet seat, and the $280 hammers, that apparently you and some others claim still happen, perhaps you should be updating your information instead of relying from "a quote from the sci-fi movie Independence Day"....


Um, sorry charlie, but I remember when it was in the news long before that movie. I had forgotten they even said it in that movie as I havent seen it in years and only a few times. I think once at the theatre and maybe 2 other times.

Your sources even say it happened, but you throw in cynical contradictions, which is it?

The whole point is, are you ready for this: Part y costs x amount of dollars, and then they rachet up the price tags by however much they assume they can get away with, and then things are slipped under the rug while we never actually know exactly how much is spent where and on what. This is the military we're talking about, you expect the to tell us the truth about anything? What's funny is I didn't even know it was an actual military ordeal, which only adds irony to your not being able to budge on any issue that may weaken your position. As if they HAD to spend all that on a fiber glass TS. Hilarious to see someone push that far and rationalize to such an extent over a toilet seat that was obviously used to cover whatever costs.

All war is deception. - Sun Zsu





Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Then you have to consider that the entire system is wrapped around the military industrial complex, US being the imperialist permanent war economy that it is. That's what the machine is, and when that's the case there's going to be enormous costs beyond the upfront military pricetag ingrained throughout the entire system.


First of all most that is built for the military is being done so by military contractors, or businesses outside of the military which provide the military with services and or products....


Like halliburtan, etc. It's fine tuned like any well running fascist system. So what's your point?



You are not talking about "China" where there is a real "military industrial complex" which has total control.



The reality is that the MIC has de facto control. Look up that term. Actually, this concept is rather universal in many other regards: The communist systems are more honest about what they are. In this "country" it's all about nobody questioning the so-called "freedom". As long as it's not questioned and therefore challenged then nobody has to learn the truth about what it actually is underneath the surface. For proof just look back to the 60's, and what happened to those revolutionaries who challenged it. The protests havent reached the 60's levels and most people still either believe they're "free" or they've been trained to not care even if they aren't. The latter takes a good education. It is possible to train people to think in stupid terms, and to be politically-nationally biased to self-deceive and to ignore contrarian views and facts to maintain ideal delusional realities, for comfort and self-esteem.






Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No?
Over 700 military bases in over 100 nations.
www.alternet.org...
Troops in 159 of 193 total world nations.


U.S. military bases around the world are based uponagreements made with other nations....


I never said they were strong armed by force into submission. From there you deflect and subvert everything I said to avoid the issue.

From now on, America, you can always tell that a state ins't a hegemonic imperial "superpower" when they have military bases all over the world and forward deployed supercarriers (12+ when no other nation has more than one). If a nation doesn't have all of that then they're surely either trying to take over the world or trying to maintain a taken over world.



BTW, perhaps you are not aware that allies of ours train in many U.S. military bases, including in the U.S.....


I know. They even train here on US soil (to subvert and overthrow their own governments):
www.google.com...






Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
What sad with places like Cuba and Venezuela is that you really have to wonder what sort of motives the characters initially intended or were at least initially justified with


As always and for some reason some people try to find an excuse to condone dictators such as castro...


Well if you weren't an "American Imperialism Denier" you'd be able to at least see my view. You'd understand that our CIA/military is responsible for installing dictatorships and rigging electionsall over the globe, or at least trying to (recent Venezuela coup attempt for example, I know you'll claim we didn't do it, of course not not "US"). It amuses me seeing people look at the facts of the near world wide de facto dictatorship tha tthe US represents and then still assume that our system isn't corrupt to the very core. Our system can install dictatorships, but it isn't one no way. If the US Establishment would have killed castro they would have installed a new dictatorship to replace his, which his was already a replacement of the US's pre-existing dictatorship, and perhaps we'd still have de facto control of there like much of the rest of the continent.

Condone? Your "logic" assumes so, as I had already pointed out, because your absolutist reasoning sees in only left/right, on/off, 0/1, etc/etc. And Iran is an actuall threat to the U.S. too, right?



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
And people wonder why there are "terrorists" 'out there'? Military spending leads to an ongoing need for more military spending, and it's been that way for over 60 years. And then when "they" just so happen to come up with some new medical discovery or whatever the military is praised for the development, as if we wouldn't get the same breakthru's if all the military spending was instead on the betterment of humanity.
America's death toll on the world: 27000000++
What empire?


I see that you learnt a lot from Moore as you yourself resort to exagerations and lies...


Don't mess around, and deflect some tidbits over in here to keep people from going there to see the nitty gritty. Go challenge it there. I've already decimated scores of arguments like yours in that thread. Those things happened because of US Hegemony. There wouldn't have been a Pol Pot or a war in Vietnam if the US Establishment wouldn't have taken the colonialist position they did from the very beginning, that is before the Communists were even in the picture.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
.................
I've already decimated scores of arguments like yours in that thread. Those things happened because of US Hegemony. There wouldn't have been a Pol Pot or a war in Vietnam if the US Establishment wouldn't have taken the colonialist position they did from the very beginning, that is before the Communists were even in the picture.


*aatchuuuu* BS *COUGH*....*snif* i am sorry, I have the flu at the moment... anyways, nice try to blame the U.S. for what a COMMUNIST REGIME did.....


[edit on 3-8-2007 by Muaddib]

Edit: Please review- Courtesy Is Manditory

[edit on 3-8-2007 by intrepid]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 12:10 PM
link   
So you're saying that all of those millions people in Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia would have been slaughtered by the US or others, even if the US wouldn't have blown off Ho Chi Minh's pleas for the Imperial US to get their Imperial France ally to stop being imperialist, while the time was good, after WW2 and before Communism entered the picture to compensate for lack of US "democratic" (capitalist) backing? Or if the US wouldn't have stepped in to attempt to comandeer France's lost colony (which was an all to convenient of a location around China opposite S. Korea / Japan)? If the US didn't support blocking the elections before the split of the state, where Minh would have won by a landslide (voting = democracy?)? If US backed Hanoi wasn't just another repressive US ally, which cost the support of the South Vietnamese (or perhaps he had to be repressive because his government was an illegitimate US puppet regime)? If LBJ wouldn't have engineered the Gulf of Tonkin incident to justify the invasion? If the US wouldn't have dropped more bombs on Cambodia than were dropped in all of WW2? If the CIA wouldn't have overthrown the Cambodian leadership, which finally resulted in the Khmer Rouge's vacuum power grab?

Blame the people at the end of the ordeal, not those responsible for the imperial by-products as mentioned, right? Total hypocrisy. Please do bring your best arguments over to that thread, where it is the topic...
You can also go challenge the historical consensus and things like the Pentagon Papers over at wikipedia since you know the way things really were back then?
en.wikipedia.org...


EDIT: It's actually ironic that this all came up, as France was the original fountain. of the Vietnam conflict, and now they just so happen to be a central item in Moore's film. If it makes you feel any better, many of the French in those times were apparently hypocrite's as millions protested the US's actions there.


[edit on 3-8-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 01:13 PM
link   
errr....wow....first of all the thread is not about "the conflicts the U.S. has been in " and whether you want the world to believe your lies and exagerations that all deaths were because of the U.S.... You are not alone in here, there are people who blame the U.S. for what the soviet Union did to Kosovo and even Chechnya.... soon enough you and some others are also going to claim the people killed under Communist U.S.S.R. was also the fault of the U.S.....


BTW, we were at first talking about "your claim" that the deaths under Pol Pot were caused by the U.S.... then you turn around and generalize every war between the west and Communism and you claim "it was all because the U.S.".....


Your history is definitedly messed up, or for some reason you are willingly lying and exagerating through your teeth on the history of those conflicts...

Anyways, you should discuss "your version" of those conflicts in that thread you started, I really have no intention or need to spend any part of my time discussing such events with someone who is willing to exagerate and lie as if "his version" was the truth...

Go and try to spread your lies and disinformation all you want....



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   
This post has been removed by the staff. If you have a complaint, use the complaint feature, or u2u a staff member. Do not distrupt threads or try to create drama.


[edit on 5-8-2007 by The Vagabond]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Um, wow.

So I checked the US caused deaths thread, where all of this is the actual topic, but I dont see your arguments over there. This isnt the first time I've suggested taking this there.

It's fascinating seeing how at first you were going almost sentence by sentence arguing my words, but now you're resorting to generalizing with blanket denial.

Which point was wrong? You didnt argue even one of them, you simply denied all of them. I guess the historical record is wrong and Pol Pot's existence (that wasn't even his name until he became the overlord he was) wasn't a by-product of US imperial intervention. I suggest you go visit the talk page at wikipedia and tell those historians to stop telling lies there.

I'd really love to debate this further with you, and since you're obviously right about everything you should definitely go to my 27M thread and debunk the entire thing, because after all this isnt even the topic here and this is merely a "breaking news" thread anyways which will be forgotten before not too long. Lastly, since there's no such thing as American Imperialism you should debunk that there too as that's the premise and you can also debunk my US Hegemony thread linked in my sig below.


Or you can admit that the US Empire does infact exist and that we're 9TRILLION in debt because of it, and then we can all discuss the fact that thanks to the imperial war machine we're taxed to death and therefore Michael Moore gets to make money on this film in question here and the rest like the taxes that would rise even more with Moore's health plan because all the nations money goes to the military imperial war machine, for "Defense". Er ahem, to not being taken out of context: ...and that if it weren't for the 100 years of unconstitutional imperial taxes that Moore wouldn't even be worth Moore's time to make that movie because society would be far better off thanks to most American families really having things to leave their loved ones when they die, as this has been going on for multiple overlapping generations. You know I have the original income tax form, I think it's 1913, and it's funny how it's only 1% tax. One has to wonder how the government ever managed to exist and build warships before the income tax, most of the other introduced taxes, the inflation tax via the "Federal" Reserve, and so on?!? Imagine the health care everyone would have if 15+++% of their money wasn't scraped right off the top of their paychecks while their buying power is on a constant inflation decline (inflation was 13.7% last month according to the Gold Exchange site Kitco.com, the highest in 30 years).

Now to get bring this all totally on topic, as this exchange has seemingly strayed off topic at best, I support Moore's arguments that this is a form of fear induced social control. As are many other elements of the US economy / environment. Classical "Culture of Fear" tactics. You see while our "democracy' doesn't come right out in the open with the big stick (well unless challenged), it resorts to a plethora of subtle social controls such as fear of losing ones job/house/etc, and then things like terrorism, global warming, and so on. Keep us scared and complacent has been the name of the game for a good 60 years (since the system went to full blown global hegemonic "superpower"), and Moore exposed another form of this which I had overlooked as I myself dont even have healthcare or work an standard hourly job (piece-work, ind. contractor), or have thousands of people sending me letters with my nonexistent staff of at least dozens to analyze the it all, to have such perspective. As a fact-checker myself, particularly in the realms of discussion I've brought forth here, Moore's SiCKO gets the thumbs up by me on that element of his film.

[edit on 3-8-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone
I really can't wait to see it. I heard he gets 50% of whatever it takes. Good for him I say
No more producer restrictions on his next film


“It’s a really interesting irony for me,” Moore says of his expected financial windfall. “What it should do to me is remind me every single day that I have an even greater responsibility to do good with the success that I have been blessed with. I need to make sure that I am able to make the next film with the money that I have made on this film. The money allows me to never have to give in, never compromise. Nothing can ever be held over my . in the sense of, ‘If you don’t do this, we won’t give you your money!’ ‘Oh, wow, I guess I’ll be in really bad shape, won’t I?’ That’s an enormous bit of freedom that I have — to stay completely true to the things I believe in. But I have an even greater responsibility because I have been blessed with that great success. I challenge myself with that, constantly.”

For a man who seems to be doing his best to destroy the free market system, Moore sure does sound like a capitalist!



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Um, wow.

So I checked the US caused deaths thread, where all of this is the actual topic, but I dont see your arguments over there. This isnt the first time I've suggested taking this there.
............


What the heck is the point?... It is pretty obvious you just want to spread hatred against the U.S. and even blame, as some others do everything on the U.S.



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I haven't seen the movie but I probaly will. I am not a fan of Michael Moore, but I do like whisle blowers with fact backed issues. I do have a good idea of how the US civilian medical system works. I think the biggest problem is hospitals and doctor offices are ran like a business instead of a service trying to help people. A few years ago I did not have insurance and needed to get x-rays after getting jumped( a few days later, after I was still hurting). I knew if I just showed up I would get lousy service and I had an old issurance card from when I was under my parents coverage. I went to a hospital in a poor area and there were many people in the ER room waiting to be seen, because they thought I had insurance I was seen immediatly. I got X-rays, told a police officer what happened, in saw the doctor for less than 5 minutes and was told nothing was broken and he gave me an rx for painkillers. After it was all done I ended being billed for about $1000 just for x-rays and 5 minutes of the doctor's time. There is no way someone who cannot afford insurance can afford medical care can afford even a trip to the doctor's office. While there are free clinics for limited health problems, there are too many people and not enough people for them to be effective.

Health care being ran like a business is certainly a major problem, but it is sad that tax paying Americans cannot not get health care. Maybe an optional 5% or less tax on someone's wages for a government health care plan would work. Also letting medical students practice limited medicine for those who can't afford would help to.

I need to watch the movie and see that perspective.



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 05:49 PM
link   
I too am not a fan of M M and will not be going to see the movie. But my reason is that health care in America was a bad joke for me long before this flick came along.

The root cause of many of our woes in this nation is paid lobbyists. The drug companies have them, the Big Oil boys have them, the Jews have them, the AARP have them, the Insurance Cartels have them, anybody that wants to rip off America does it by way of the paid lobby bag men.

The Veterans Administration makes drug purchases in bulk from the major pharmaceutical companies, and so negotiates lower prices on many drugs, sometimes at a savings of over $250USD on a monthly usage per person. But Medicare cannot, by law, negotiate for a lower price. This taxpayer ripoff was worked in with a late night session of Congress, where the lobbyist from the pharmaceutical companies actually outnumbered congressmen.

And then, when the congressman who rammed this bill through, retired he took a cushy $2MillionUSD a YEAR job with one of these same pharmaceutical companies. Gee, I wonder how that happened?

Now I know some of you will want references. I watched this on 60 Minutes last week, or the week before. I'm just reporting what I saw this Congressman admit to on a national TV show.

Drugs are cheaper in many other nations because the don't cost that much to make in the first place. Rant all you want about R&D costs, but if they can afford to sell them cheaper overseas, why should America get soaked?

Insurance, in every flavor, is a joke in poor taste. A hurricane wipes out your house, but the storm insurance doesn't cover it because it was the storms floodwaters that caused the house to be so weak it blew away.


Or my personal story. My wife is driving along and a cop standing in the road puts up his hand for her to stop, because a cow had been struck by another driver and was blocking traffic. My wife obeys the cop and two minutes later is rear ended by a drunk who never even tried to hit the brakes. Drunk gets a ticket and goes to jail, his insurance reluctantly buys us another car to replace the one that was totaled.

If that was the end of the story we could say that the system worked, except it doesn't end there. Two months later we get a notice from State Farm that their good hands are needing more cash from us. You see she was INVOLVED in an accident. It didn't matter that she was not at fault, or that she would have been breaking the law to have done anything except obey the cop. Our monthly costs were set to go up over double what they had been.

And the insurance industry has forced auto insurance on motorist in most states, and yet they weasel out of everything they can, and legally rip you off the rest of the time. And how did they get so much power? They have a very powerful lobby. (And guess who is holding all the face cards on the doctor malpractice issue?)

We will never see prices decline, good health care, fair courts and laws, and a host of other issues resolved, until we make it illegal to buy our elected prostitutes.



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 10:52 PM
link   


Quote originally by NG:
We will never see prices decline, good health care, fair courts and laws, and a host of other issues resolved, until we make it illegal to buy our elected prostitutes.

The biggest thing in human medicine causing high costs is that anyone can sue any doctor, hospital or drug company at any time asking for as much money as they want. This is thanks to lawyers like John Edward and his ilk. He didn't invent the process but he certainly is the poster boy for excessive litigation in health care! The doctors have to pay incredible fees for insurance and they have to look at their patients as adversaries. The hospitals are in the same boat and are constantly having to charge enough to cover their litigation. Drug companies are forced to very extensively test their drugs and then if one ever goes bad like Vioxx they got sued by every person that ever took the drug (exageration) even though it gave millions of people the pain relief they wanted and it had some mild (but sometimes serious) heart side effects. I guess people only want perfect drugs! (drugs practically by definition have side effects)
There has got to be more balance here. The way it is, everyone suffers. The patients and the health care delivery system. And for what? The only ones benifiting are the lawyers! The patients rarely get much after their long and painful litigation process. The doctors and the rest of the system simply hire lawyers and go on with their lives. Pay higher insurance fees and pass on the costs. Ho hum. Will we ever get wise and ask our elected officials to limit the litigation?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join