Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Disney Forbids Distribution of Film Criticizing Bush

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I am so sick and tired of these fake-ass patriot repugnants, pretending to love freedom and the tenets that make America great but barring freedom of speech when it smears one of their own, speech that EVERY American should hear because its true! I am so sick of these friggin' Nazis!

WASHINGTON, May 4 The Walt Disney Company is blocking its Miramax division from distributing a new documentary by Michael Moore that harshly criticizes President Bush, executives at both Disney and Miramax said Tuesday.

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," links Mr. Bush and prominent Saudis including the family of Osama bin Laden and criticizes Mr. Bush's actions before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks....

Mr. Moore's agent, Ari Emanuel, said that Michael D. Eisner, Disney's chief executive, asked him last spring to pull out of the deal with Miramax. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner expressed concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor....

Mr. Moore said the film describes financial connections between the Bush family and its associates and prominent Saudi Arabian families that go back three decades. He said it closely explores the government's decision to help members of the bin Laden family leave the United States immediately after the 2001 attacks. The film includes comments from American soldiers on the ground in Iraq expressing disillusionment with the war, he said.

www.nytimes.com...

Aren't any of you getting tired of these damn Nazis?



[Edited on 4-5-2004 by Colonel]




posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Normally I'd agree with you, but the filmmaker's name says it all:

Michael Moore.

In case you remain part of the uninformed, swill-swallowing masses, Moore is the leftest answer to Joseph Goebbel's "Triumph of the Will." He is a propaganda machine, using false pretenses, false information, and wholly contrived "facts" in order to accomplish his agenda.

I doubt Disney is refusing to carry it based onthe fact that it criticises Bush. Rather, they perhaps have the insight to realise that Moore's propaganda machine is riddled with error. Unlike libel and slander allowances to be made for those in public light, Moore's attempt - I'm sure - is not strictly "satirical." That is, Moore has most likely - and intentionally - skewed facts for his liberal dogma. If that's his aim, then so be it. But it's up to Disney whether they carry the film or not.

It's not about censorship, it's about rational thought.

www.spinsanity.org...

and

www.redeemernews.org...

are both primary examples of how spin totally obscures anything resembling veracity in Moore's work. He's a smart guy, and I'm sure there are some coherent ideas in his work. He just needs to not falsify so much information.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:27 PM
link   
You know, I could probably get pissed about it if I wasn't so totally unsurpised. Election year and all.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Whatever Colonel....Micheal Moore is a scumbag!
MMooreExposed

Btw, talk about 'shadowy' connections:
And probe the shadowy connections between Moore and the bin Ladens.

I'm sure after I stop laughing over this and you posting it like it is worth a grain of merit, I will feel some sort of remorse for Micheal Moore's 1st Amendment rights being trampled......





seekerof



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," links Mr. Bush and prominent Saudis including the family of Osama bin Laden and criticizes Mr. Bush's actions before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks....


Also -- On a more (Moore...more..ha ha!) friendly side note, you should read up on the book:
"House of Bush, House of Saud." It analyses and discusses the relationships - politically, economically, and socially - of the Bush and Saudi Royal families.
I suggest you check it out, it's really informative and not too biased, either.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I'm sure after I stop laughing over this and you posting it like it is worth a grain of merit, I will feel some sort of remorse for Micheal Moore's 1st Amendment rights being trampled......


seekerof


No, you won't because you really don't care about First Amendment Rights if they attack your man. Don't even lie. They can spill any bull# nonsesne about Kerry's war medals that he EARNED in WAR but, speak one ill word about Bush and his lies and his his effed up connections that could have contributed to 9-11 and all hell breaks loose.

Mauskov: What's the difference between Moore and this book your referring to? Just the author but they both say the same thing.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:37 PM
link   
On the contrary, I think this is a great example of freedom of speech - freedom not to speak, as it were. A private company certainly has the right to choose what it wants to publish.

However, if there were evidence of the government barring this from being distributed, there would be cause for concern. The whole "tax break" part worries me, but seeing as how the source for that is Moore's agent, I would think twice before believing it.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurdueNuc
On the contrary, I think this is a great example of freedom of speech - freedom not to speak, as it were. A private company certainly has the right to choose what it wants to publish.


Precisely.
It is no more totalitarian to be forced to carry a film than to make the decision not to.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Sharpen your "sword" like all the other DU'ers Colonel, k?

I know where you been......you aren't fooling anyone!

GET OUR YOUR SWORDS!!! Disney Forbidding "Fahrenheit 911"

Geez, that topic title reads and sounds like something you would say and post....

MMoore is a self-rightous pompous idiot that is making a living off of you and others by making so-called documentaries. Want to see a real documentary...try this one:
Micheal Moore Hates America


But back to your topic, maybe Disney is figuring that this will only lower their profit margins by releasing such idiotic spoutings? Don't feel to distressed over this, I understand that Comcast is thinking very seriously of buying the distribution rights to MMoores latest and greatest documentary.


Things do have a way of working themselves out huh, Colonel? Keep the faith.



seekerof



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurdueNuc
On the contrary, I think this is a great example of freedom of speech - freedom not to speak, as it were. A private company certainly has the right to choose what it wants to publish.

However, if there were evidence of the government barring this from being distributed, there would be cause for concern. The whole "tax break" part worries me, but seeing as how the source for that is Moore's agent, I would think twice before believing it.


This is just the type of twisted Orwellian mentality that this country has come to. "Freedom not to speak" is a concept where the government forces you to say something that you don't believe. Here, speech is been chilled b/c of what the government might do to a company financially.

You see the Nazi mindset here?



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
This is not a first admendment issue, it's an economic one, which makes it even more sickening. According to the NY Times article, Disney was worried that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives in Florida, where Jeb is governor. Even if you loathe what Moore says, you should be willing to die for his right to say it.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
This is not a first admendment issue, it's an economic one, which makes it even more sickening. According to the NY Times article, Disney was worried that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives in Florida, where Jeb is governor. Even if you loathe what Moore says, you should be willing to die for his right to say it.


This is a complete First Amendment issue because the company fears government retaliation (endangering of tax breaks) if this film is distributed. THIS CHILLS SPEECH!



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   
You're calling my logic twisted? I'm sure the execs at Disney have many reasons for not wanting to carry Moore's film. If the "tax break" reason is actually true (doubtful), maybe that was just their way of telling Moore "Take a hike, you ranting ..." Welcome to the world of political correctness.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Don't you think that it is possible that this is Disney's way of getting a shot in AT Bush? They put this forth and everyone goes, "those Republican bastards."



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel
This is just the type of twisted Orwellian mentality that this country has come to. "Freedom not to speak" is a concept where the government forces you to say something that you don't believe. Here, speech is been chilled b/c of what the government might do to a company financially.
You see the Nazi mindset here?


There is a difference between allowing something and accepting something. If another studio wants to carry the film, all the power to them. Disney does not have to accept Moore's p-o-v: How is the forceful acception of something (in your skewed perspective, "freedom of speech") any different than this Nazism you keep ranting about?

What Disney does as a company is upto Disney: They don't have to carry something if they don't want to. Surely you don't think that people don't have the right to be discerning? Is it not my right to accept or not accept what I choose? It's not an issue of Free Speech, Moore wasn't 'offed' by the government. It's an issue of free enterprise.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mauskov

What Disney does as a company is upto Disney: They don't have to carry something if they don't want to. Surely you don't think that people don't have the right to be discerning? Is it not my right to accept or not accept what I choose? It's not an issue of Free Speech, Moore wasn't 'offed' by the government. It's an issue of free enterprise.


Disney's bottom line is to make money (which Disney needs) as with any company. Moore makes money based upon his books and previous movies. But, now they are ditching his film...and for what...because they fear government backlash in Florida in the form of certain tax disadvantages. This is wrong.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:08 PM
link   
If Disney said, hey we don't dig Moore. Then, that's their right. But they said, it doesn't matter what we believe, it's going to hurt our pocketbook, so we aren't going to support it. That is repugnent. If you are so afraid to say or do what you believe because of what other will say, well, you're definately not a member of ATS, but you're also sad and spineless.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colonel
Disney's bottom line is to make money (which Disney needs) as with any company. Moore makes money based upon his books and previous movies. But, now they are ditching his film...and for what...because they fear government backlash in Florida in the form of certain tax disadvantages. This is wrong.


How is this wrong?
Because your bumper sticker morals dictate that everything should be rightous and free? Disney is a business, and that's exactly the point: It is at their behest for politicall reasons, perhaps, for economic reasons, also perhaps, to not distribute this film.

Let MGM or Columbia snap it up.

Who carried "Bowling for Columbine"? Offhand, I don't know. I doubt it was Disney.
Plus, perhaps Disney doesn't want to carry a highly politicised movie; another point to bring up.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:26 PM
link   
colonel, you do make a good point, whether or not it applies in this case. There has been evidence in the past of the gov't using tax breaks and federal funding to force others to do as they want. The best example I can think of is how the gov't threatened to hold back highway funding from states until they dropped their legal BAC to 0.08. Until "we the people" stop letting the federal gov't hold us hostage this way, this country is not the "united states" - it is "the state of America".

That said, let me reiterate that there were surely other factors affecting this decision. You give me some evidence that the gov't would impose penalties on Disney for distributing Moore's movie, and that this was the primary motivator for this decision, then I'll listen.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   


You give me some evidence that the gov't would impose penalties on Disney for distributing Moore's movie, and that this was the primary motivator for this decision, then I'll listen.


Disney has a theme park and many other huge enterprises in Florida, where his brother, Jeb Bush, is governor. Where is the other theme park, oh yeah, California.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join