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.

 

Fahrenheit 9/11 - now, the heat

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2004 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Whether or not MM knew or cared whether Disney would be involved in its distribution, this film is going to stir the pot more than Bowling For Columbine did and show a surfeit of previously unseen material.

The PR campaign is deliberately incendiary and inflammatory, and if the film does its bit in getting "Bush is good for America" out of the psyche of people that can be helped, then onwards and upwards for it.


Fahrenheit 9/11 could light fire under Bush

Monday May 17, 2004
The Guardian

Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is without doubt the most flaming-hot ticket at the Cannes film festival. And with good reason: Moore hopes that it will bring down the US government.

The American film-maker has hitherto kept a tight lid on the contents of the documentary, saying only that it includes evidence of alleged links between the Bush and Bin Laden families. However, in two appearances in Cannes at the weekend before its premiere today, he revealed that the movie contains shocking footage from Iraq.

Yesterday he said: "When you see the movie you will see things you have never seen before, you will learn things you have never known before. Half the movie is about Iraq - we were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing that it was Michael Moore. They are totally #ed."

and later (for balance)...

Moore's position has not met with universal sympathy. A piece in the Los Angeles Times last week accused his last film, Bowling for Columbine, of being "a torrent of partial truths, pointed omissions and deliberate misimpressions" and called him a "virtuoso of fictions".


www.guardian.co.uk...


Useful questions might be how did MM manage to embed journalists with the troops for so long? and whether any pro-Bush distributor can block the film before the election?

But there is another topic on how MM is a fat, stupid, useless left wing asshole, probably proved that enough there for those so inclined.




posted on May, 17 2004 @ 04:50 AM
link   
I, for one, can't stand the whiney, illconceived quasi-reporting that is the work of Moore. Bowling for Columbine was a case in point. The actual bare facts mean nothing to this man if they get in the way of a good story. He routinely, either deliberately or through incompetence, misses key facts out of everything he does in order to provide the masses with 'shocking' television.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am all for freedom of speech, including the production of films etc, though I would not think for a second that there would be enough factual content in this latest film to worry even the most desperately failing leader. We know before we see it that it will be full of holes, glaring errors, pontification and calculated guesses at best.

B



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 04:53 AM
link   

He said that at the few low-key preview screenings that have already taken place in the midwest "the reactions were overwhelming. People who were on the fence - undecided voters - suddenly weren't on the fence any more."


Looks like Kerry can save some money on campaign advertising soon.
Michael Moore and the folks at Moveon.org will be doing most of the work for him.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by benjj

...though I would not think for a second that there would be enough factual content in this latest film to worry even the most desperately failing leader. We know before we see it that it will be full of holes, glaring errors, pontification and calculated guesses at best.

B


Now, benjj, you have been at ATS far too long to be able to make a statement like this. Just as one case in point:

Last week some yahoo put a post about how 9/11 was predicted in the designs of the New Hampshire, South Carolina and New York quarters in 1999! The next day it got 9000 hits!!!!!!!!! And there were plenty of "oh my gawd! the U.S. govt knew!

No, benjj, though I wish you were correct there are plenty of crispy kreme munching couch potatoes living their life in front of the boob tube and watching re-runs of Three's Company who will just freak out and never stop to think when they see this.

Best thing is for some one to start the "debunk" documentary, uh....yesterday.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:17 AM
link   
Damn it Val, I know you're right....

There is just a tiny single molecule left in me that has hope that the world's general public has more than a shared brain cell between them, as long as this molecule exists I will always try to over, rather than under, estimate 'the people.'



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:19 AM
link   
i, for one, am very happy that there are a few Moores outthere, dedicated to expose rather discusting facts to as much people as possible... And of course i understand why certain people hate his guts or rather would like to see him silenced, so 1930s, eh?



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Yeah, im not sure what people are talking about when they say 'bowling' was full of half truths. I have read this statement a few times but have yet to see a link to cross reference.
The only inconsistancies that im aware of is the RUMOUR i read that some of the kids were actually shot by the swat team and not the 'trench coat mafia'.
Any exposure of the lies surrounding 911 is good, regardless of mistakes MM may have made in his movies.


[Edited on 17-5-2004 by aware]



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:28 AM
link   
I really don't understand where the animosity towards Moore comes from. If people don't agree with his politics, then fine, Just acknowledge that there will always be documentary's made by people with divergent views from your own.

Certainly all I hear from his detractors is "he lies, he makes it all up, he doesn't tell the truth" Having read critiques of Bowling for Columbine and his rebuttal I'm afraid I have to say that regardless of how much you may or may not have enjoyed the film, The facts presented by Moore are pretty accurate.

There will always be journalistic licence but Bowling for Columbine was a pretty good summary of the various aspects that contribute to a culture of fear. It wasn't an "anti gun" documentary.

On a side note, If he really was running around wildly presenting fiction as fact and accusing companies and private citizens of doing things they didn't do, don't you think he'd have been sued by them ? As far as I'm aware there was no legal action taken by the NRA against Moore or the documentary.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Simon

Your ATS points after that last post were 911, well done. You probably already observed that.

The release date for Moore's film is 2 July:

www.film-releases.com...

There will be a heap more free advertising before then. Not sure what the film consists of in terms of a beginning a middle and an end... it must surely open up more questions than it answers. Every day is a brand new day in the downward slide of the Bush admin in the War For Terror.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   
But, will this actually be a 'documentary' or more fiction using fuzzy math, non-existent stats, and fancy camera work?

If the Disney hyperbole is any sign of what's to come, Moore could be debunked before he finds a distributor did he find one yet?



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
I personally can't wait for the film, especially to see how much he brings up about the Saudi connections. It's not as if we haven't heard about that. I'll watch it, as with anything, with an open mind and a skeptical eye.

Anything to get people to think and ask questions, even if they're only about the reality or truth of what he puts forward; even if they only research to debunk they'll come away knowing more than they bargined for at the start. And ATS will probably come away with a few more members too...

I love the amount of energy conservatives put into hating the guy by the way. To me it shows that they really fear him.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 10:52 PM
link   
I'm confused. Do you deny the Bush/Saudi connection, or just don't like Moore?



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 10:54 PM
link   
documentary adj.

1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.

2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.

Mr. Moore


"The film is only partly to do with the Bin Ladens and Bush. I was able to send three different freelance film crews to Iraq. Soldiers had written to me to express their disillusionment with the war. It's a case of our own troops not being in support of their commander-in-chief."

"the reactions were overwhelming. People who were on the fence - undecided voters - suddenly weren't on the fence any more."

"We thought, 'We cannot leave this to the Democrats this time to f**k it up and lose.'"



Now read that definition again:

Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film

If he wants to make a two hour political ad then do it. But don't insult my intelligence bu calling it a documentary.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   


By Curme
I'm confused. Do you deny the Bush/Saudi connection, or just don't like Moore?


Me? I know quite a bit about the connections, and I want to see them get an airing, that's why I want to see it. I do quite like Moore as well. Sorry might of been confusing because of the subtle sarcasm. Maybe too subtle.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   
When he says most of the film is about Iraq, my guess is what we're going to see is footage of American soldiers either doing and saying things that won't go down well back home, and either/or commanders ordering them to do it... and with recent relevations, most likely a lot of it.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kegs



Me? I know quite a bit about the connections, and I want to see them get an airing, that's why I want to see it. I do quite like Moore as well. Sorry might of been confusing because of the subtle sarcasm. Maybe too subtle.


I didn't mean you. I meant the people who hate Moore so much, they might miss the very interesting point he is bringing up. Do you hate the messenger or the message? Where is the outrage over this Saudi thing? When Bush was flying Bin Laden's brother out of the country on 9/11, maybe he could of said, "Hey, um, about your bro..."

EDIT: excessive quoting

[Edited on 17-5-2004 by curme]



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:26 PM
link   
What 'point' is Mr. Moore bringing up Curme, that has'nt already been read, said, or heard?



seekerof



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
What 'point' is Mr. Moore bringing up Curme, that has'nt already been read, said, or heard?



seekerof


Unfortunately,the majority of Americans aren't as well read as us. House of Bush, House of Saud? Simon Hersh's articles in the New Yorker? The information is there, but you'll never know it unless you seek it. Dan Rather isn't going to start talking about it. You need someone, somewhere, to say, 'Hey, what about this?' You need someone in the mainstream media, or rather, someone who the mainstream media covers. Noam Chomsky. Not a lot of tv coverage. But Moore, who the media does covers, tells about the Saudi connection. At least it's out there. They know now, to find out more. Maybe the Bush Saudi connection is innocent coincidence, but now the average American has that choice the make the decision for themselves.



posted on May, 17 2004 @ 11:52 PM
link   
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Here be a link to a documentary (CA) called Conspiracy Theories that talks about the connection of Bush/BinLaden.



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Deny Ignorance

George Bush is Ignorant.

Not because he is a complete idiot. He is one of those special kind of in your face red neck born again Ignorant by choice types. By his own admission he does not read the newspapers. He does not like to watch news programs. Does'nt want his opinions shaped by the Leftist press. He is the perfect dupe and it is not by accident that he is surrounded by established military industrialist career politcians. They do the thinking for him.

But then George has led his whole adult life as a series of happy accidents. When he got into a real bind there was always someone there to bail him out. Out of real military service, out of jail, out of bankruptcy, out of insider trading... The list goes on.

He has never really had to think or plan or face the possibility of failure.

At 40 or so he sobered up.

Cause George has got what any good Republican would call "Moral Clarity." See I understand that because like George, I too learned what real morals are by being amoral for quite some time. Its difficult to condemn something you don't fully understand. I believe George has a good perspective on the perils of sex outside of marriage, and first hand experience with the evils of drugs and addiction. Too much of any drug will make a Republican out of anyone and alcohol is no exception.

The biggest problem as I see it with George is his
Confidence born of never having tasted failure.

This plays right into the hands of his NEO Con pals.
Might makes Right
We're the mightiest so we're the rightiest
We've got the guns to prove it and we'll use them
Theres a new shireff in town...
Its a Holy Crusade

You can follow links to some of this. Pay especial attention to mention of the House of Saud.


www.thetruthaboutgeorge.com...



www.cooperativeresearch.org...

www.buzzflash.com...

Driving Drunk (How old was he?)
www.georgewbush.org...

Military Records
www.csmonitor.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join