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.

 

Anti Moore Nitwits, leave us alone.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by shanti23
[the very fact that they were flown out is sufficient.
who cares who made the order to fly them out, it certainly wasn't without bin laden and saudi intervention.

It makes a world of difference when Moore is attempting to plant a seed of direct complicity between Bush and the order to fly. It is deceptive, deceitful, and fraudulent. It destroys one of the basic premises of the docudrama, and it shows Moore to be a liar.


Richard Clarke: "I take responsibility for it. I don't think it was a mistake, and I'd do it again," he added. The Saudis and bin Laden's relatives were flown from the U.S. out of fear for their safety following the terror attacks.



from shanti: now, according to the authorities, the saudis weren't implemented in the 9-11 attack, or did i miss that fact?
so why fly their family out?
if they knew it was bin laden who was responsible for the attack, then why fly his family out?
and why not fly out all muslim nationals while he's at it, for their 'safety'

The article states why Clarke made the decision. And why not fly out all muslim nationals? Maybe because all muslim nationals don't have the name bin Laden.
[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]




posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
It makes a world of difference when Moore is attempting to plant a seed of direct complicity between Bush and the order to fly.


My personal opinion is that bush would have trouble tying his shoelaces, let alone organising the horrendous mess that is the 'war against terrorism' (although, richard clarke may shoulder the blame for that too, who knows?)

Take this press conference at the White House on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 as an example of his 'leadership'


Question
You've looked back before 9-11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9-11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have learned from it?

g.w.bush(actual words):
"I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it. John, I'm sure historians will look back and say, gosh, he could've done it better this way or that way. You know, I just -- I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet."


Now there's a leader! a man who can think on his feet! Someone who knows exactly what he is doing and why he is doing it! the kind of man who wouldn't just sit on his thumb while the country was under attack.

as for your point:


Originally posted by jsobecky
The article states why Clarke made the decision. And why not fly out all muslim nationals? Maybe because all muslim nationals don't have the name bin Laden.


Osama bin Laden responsible for 9-11?
Hell, lets give his family private planes and fly them out to safety, what a master-stroke of security brilliance, what a credit to the intelligence gathering community richard clarke must be.

so why the Saudis? they don't have the name bin Laden...maybe because they run an oil business together? is that the reason they flew them out on the same day? maybe the FBI was running a family discount on plane tickets that day...


Youssef Sleiman, Iraq Initiatives - Harris Corporation "...once that oil starts flowing, and money coming, there's gonna be lots of money...it's the second largest oil reserve in the world..."


Hmm... maybe there's a link here somewhere...i know there is...I wonder what it could be...

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 07:30 AM
link   
On the subject of a libel suit brought by the White House against Michael Moore.

That would be EXCELLENT, and no doubt the White House would win. However, this president and his lovely wife have a lot of class. More than Michael Moore could have in 100 life times. Based on recent behavior, I doubt G.W. would bother to lower himself to Michael Moores level.

When Clinton left the White House, he and his demon hord left it in shambles. Porn graffiti on the walls, equipment damage, etc. G.W. could have embarrassed Clinton and shown everyone the extremely disrespectful and damaging things that Clinton and his goons did. BUT, G.W. took the high road and just documented the damage and had it repaired. BTW - it was us tax payers that paid for the repairs to the White House that were needed after Clinton left.

G.W. took the high road and ignored the classless illegal damage done by the former president, probably so as not to bring more dishonor to the presidency (Clinton sure had brought enough already - wag the dog, monica, etc.)

I would LOVE to see Michael Moore be the recepient of a Slander/Liable law suit. I just don't see the class act that is in the White House now doing it. Perhaps a conservative group could bring up a lawsuit FOR him .... but I don't know law very well at all and I don't know if that is possible.



[edit on 7/5/2004 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Flyersfan
However, this president and his lovely wife have a lot of class. More than Michael Moore could have in 100 life times. Based on recent behavior, I doubt G.W. would bother to lower himself to Michael Moores level.


Ahh, so mr bush is too 'classy' to protect his reputation and the reputation of the United States Government.

well that clears everything up.

tbh, I'd prefer Clinton in the oval office enjoying a healthy bit of extra-marital fellatio than the current world situation.

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   
You don't get it. George Bush wouldn't drag the Office of the President through the mud of personal vendetta lawsuits. Clinton probably would. (unless Hillary had the offending party whacked, then the problem would 'go away') G.W. would just give Michael Moore enough rope to hang himself with. G.W. won't lower the office to Moores level.

I'd still love to see a slander suit brought against Moore.
That would be wonderful. I didn't even think of it until
someone here mentioned it. I now hope a third party does it.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
You don't get it. George Bush wouldn't drag the Office of the President through the mud of personal vendetta lawsuits.


bush has ALREADY dragged the presidency through the mud.


g.w.bush:
"our Nation - this generation - will lift a dark threat of violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail."


the dark threat of violence has INCREASED and is now a firm part of our FUTURE.

the world has not rallied, it is polarising for conflict.

we have already FAILED.

there will be no libel suit because there is no libel
it is as simple as that.

now which country is next on the pre-emptive strike list?
maybe france, they were against us when it counted most!
they are the terrorists!
*give me a gun - i need to spread democracy and make the world a safer place!

to echelon:
*on reflection I feel it is necessary to emphasise that this is irony and not an actual declaration.


[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 08:39 AM
link   
shanti23-

bush has ALREADY dragged the presidency through the mud.

the dark threat of violence has INCREASED and is now a firm part of our FUTURE. the world has not rallied, it is polarising for conflict. we have already FAILED. There will be no libel suit because there is no libel
it is as simple as that.

now which country is next on the pre-emptive strike list? maybe france, they were against us when it counted most! they are the terrorists!Give me a gun - i need to spread deomcracy and make the world a safer place!

************

No, G.W. has not dragged the presidency through the mud. You are thinking of Bill Clinton. Monicagate-travelgate-wagthedoggate- etc.etc.

You are correct, the world IS a very dangerous place today and it will continue to be - as long as appeasement reigns in countries that coddle terrorists. The world IS polarizing for conflict. Absolutely. Either you are with us, or with the terrorists. America didn't start this war. Appeasers of Wahabbit terrorists and the terrorists themselves did. (Saudi Arabia, France, etc.)

We have already failed? I guess you want to surrender to them and become a Wahabbi Muslim, and live life like they did 900 years ago. (no technology, no modern medicine, no science, so space travel, no TV or cell phones, or rock concerts, or even bacon for that matter) You must be from France. Let the terrorists have their way around the world, sympathize with them, appease them so they hit us last, cuddle them and hug a tree with them.

I doubt France is on the pre-emptive strike list. Yes, they are a terrorist nation. However, they have dug their own grave. France will become a Muslim country within a generation. Frenchies will no longer have their wine, perfume, 'art' .... it will all go against the Muslim religion and won't be tolerated. They will all have to convert or die. So I wouldn't worry about getting a gun and going over there just yet.

As far as the libel suit goes - I doubt G.W. will bring one, simply because he is too busy with protecting America and he has too much class. However there may be other groups who will. I welcome it. Michael Moore needs to be held accountable for his slander and lies.



[edit on 7/5/2004 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The world IS polarizing for conflict. Absolutely. Either you are with us, or with the terrorists.


This philosophy has a name...either you adhere to our views, or you're the enemy...riiiight.


Originally posted by FlyersFan
We have already failed? I guess you want to surrender to them and become a Wahabbi Muslim, and live life like they did 900 years ago.


If people like Michael Moore don't poke around, then we'll ALL be in the stone age. Metaphorically, we already are with these attitudes...

I can see I've got a LOT of posting to do to convince you otherwise Flyersfan.

peace. (for now!)

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
As far as the libel suit goes - I doubt G.W. will bring one, simply because he is too busy with protecting America and he has too much class. However there may be other groups who will. I welcome it.


Because poor Dubya has never shown any proclivity for running to the Supreme Court when things aren't going his way, has he?


No-one will sue Moore. If they were going to, it would have happened already. The reason they haven't done it, is that they don't want their dirty laundry to be aired in public.

Kind of makes you wonder what they're hiding, doesn't it?



When Clinton left the White House, he and his demon hord left it in shambles. Porn graffiti on the walls, equipment damage, etc. G.W. could have embarrassed Clinton and shown everyone the extremely disrespectful and damaging things that Clinton and his goons did. BUT, G.W. took the high road and just documented the damage and had it repaired. BTW - it was us tax payers that paid for the repairs to the White House that were needed after Clinton left.


I take it you have evidence of this? Or did you just dream it?


I doubt France is on the pre-emptive strike list. Yes, they are a terrorist nation.


A new all-time ignorance record for FlyersFan, ladies and gentlemen.


You do have clear, compelling evidence to show that France is a "terrorist nation", don't you? After all, I'm sure you'd simply hate to post uninformed, witless crap...



[edit on 5-7-2004 by StrangeLands]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I doubt France is on the pre-emptive strike list. Yes, they are a terrorist nation.


I had a chuckle at that one too


With that logic, Ireland is a terrorist country too...You had better keep an eye on your police force...the terrorist inside!!

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 09:26 AM
link   
For those of you who slept through the transition from Clinton to G.W.
google up 'Clinton White House damage'

www.truthorfiction.com...
Here is one site for those too lazy to bother looking it up.
There are many others. The damage to the White House is a fact.
Not a dream. A fact.

Yes, France is a terrorist nation. France was more interested in continuing it's illegal oil activities with Iraq than stopping the murders, rapes, and mutilations that were happening to MILLIONS of Iraqis. Chirac is an idiot who vacations in Canada while 15,000 elderly French die in the summer heat. (what would the world have said if 15,000 Americans died in July while G.W. spent the month vacationing out of country?) France has been in bed with Saddam and his murderous regime for decades - supplying goods and military parts despite the UN mandate not to. Chirac told Saddam that he would ensure that America wouldn't invade Iraq and that Saddam could continue to butcher and rape and mutilate - and he could continue his illegal activities with France and Koffi Annans son who was in charge of the Oil for Food program at the UN.

France will complete it's transition to full Terrorist state within this generation. It will become a Full Wahabbi nation very soon. Those are demographic facts.

BTW - Thank you, Strangelands, for your 'all time' salute. When a person who obviously doesn't get it says things like that it just makes my day all the brighter.
Thanks! I'll be smiling all day.

[edit on 7/5/2004 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 09:33 AM
link   
you can say he made this film for money.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 09:51 AM
link   
You know what I think is funny about this whole Fahrenheit 9/11 fiasco..? If someone had made the same kind of film during the Clinton administration, criticizing, making fun of, and all around making Clinton look like a fool, it would by no means of had the same impact as this one seemingly has. The media would not advertise it, people would criticize it, it would have been nothing compared to F9/11.

I just laugh when I think about the hypocricy I see coming from a lot of left-wingers, but oh well. That's politics for you.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
France has been in bed with Saddam and his murderous regime for decades - supplying goods and military parts despite the UN mandate not to.


Have you watched Fahrenheit 9-11 Flyersfan?
I ask because you can't have been paying attention when it showed Donald Rumsfield shaking Saddam Hussein's hand as a special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.

I wonder what they were talking about, eh?


Government Accounting Office
the letter also said that the condition of the White House offices was "...consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy."


Doesn't sound too bad, maybe the antique door knobs were lost during a party?

hmm...I wonder what state Iraq will be in after that 'extended occupancy'?
now I wonder which one is worse?

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
Have some goddamn respect.

Saying these members got all their info out of Moore's movie is like saying an american citizen is getting all he/she knows about america out of a flyer on america in a travel agency in china.


I find it a bit disheartening that you think so little of the country and yet, so highly of Moore.

Whether someone agrees with his motives or not, criticize constructively. I'm not saying that you don't have the right to be critical because you do. Just don't say something is wrong and not have a clue as to HOW TO IMPROVE IT.

That is exactly what is being done.

[edit on 7/7/2004 by BigJohn]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Does M. Moore ever say that his movie is unbiased? I always thought he was open about the fact that it was biased, that it was HIS point of view. It's a moot point to argue that.
But I also see alot of the dribble Bush says is biased and unfactual. The Commision on 9/11 saying Osama and Sadam not having any strong ties to each other, with Bush responding that they did, only evidence is his word.
Any 'hollywood' movie that has a strong left agenda goes under the radar. I wouldn't really say that F-9/11 was a hollywood movie. 'Spartan' with Val Kilmer, showed the White House in a bad light, and it went under the radar.

It must be horrible being a Right-Winged Conservative. I mean, with the entire media industry out to get you and promote their quazi-communist social ideals. Being bombarded by all the news-papers, televison, hollywood and radio. It's a good thing you have your guns.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigJohn
I find it a bit disheartening that you think so little of the country and yet, so highly of Moore.

Whether someone agrees with his motives or not, criticize constructively. I'm not saying that you don't have the right to be critical because you do. Just don't say something is wrong and not have a clue as to HOW TO IMPROVE IT.

That is exactly what is being done.


Would you mind reading the thread before replying?
This thread HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT MOVIE!!!!!!!!
Apart from that a load of fanatic TICKS can't see anything else anymore then F9/11 and they attack other users on any subject even remotely relating to the subjects covered in F9/11, saying they have inspired all their info and their topic on that damn movie.

I'll repeat it again. That movie has been around for a few weeks. These topics have been around for years, and the members even longer in some cases.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Here is one site for those too lazy to bother looking it up.
There are many others. The damage to the White House is a fact.
Not a dream. A fact.

Ah, that's "fact" in the lesser-used "exaggerated nonsense" sense of the word. Interesting. FlyersFan, your own damn link says that the "pornographic graffitti" you referred to didn't even exist. Indeed, the General Services Administration report on Bush's whiny allegations found:


"The condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy," according to a GSA statement. ... No wholesale slashing of cords to computers, copiers and telephones, no evidence of lewd graffiti or pornographic images. GSA didn't bother to nail down reports of pranks, which were more puckish than destructive.

...

"They told me that there were papers that were not organized lying on the floor and on desks; there were some scratches here and there, but the bottom line was they didn't see anything really in their view that was significant and that would appear to some as real extensive damage," said Bernard Unger, director for physical infrastructure for the General Accounting Office, which asked GSA to look into the allegations.

Those animals! How dare they leave the place in such a terrible state!
And people say Republicans don't have a sense of humour...



Yes, France is a terrorist nation. ***snip*** Those are demographic facts.

This, frankly, is just bizarre. I thought I'd been on ATS for long enough to read every insane rant out there, but obviously not. I suppose it's expecting too much for you to supply any evidence for all this, FF - oh, and I suggest you check the links this time, to avoid accidentally making yourself look stupid.



Thanks! I'll be smiling all day.

So you should be. Ignorance is, after all, bliss.



Editted for typos and to add more
s

[edit on 5-7-2004 by StrangeLands]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by bookofdeath2
you can say he made this film for money.


Of course he did. You make money too I take it?

I also hear he advocates file sharing and doesn't mind if his films are downloaded as long as no profit is made from the sale of burned copies.

His exact words being:


"Share away! I don't agree with copyright laws and I don't have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it...as long as they're not trying to make a profit off my labor...

I make these movies and books and TV shows because I want things to change, and so the more people who get to see them, the better."


Ahh.. the irony of anti-moore sites hosting the torrent...

Anyway, what's your point?

[edit on 5-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I think that Bush is the stupidest thing i have seen- its all about reputation and himself- but besides the point Moore is a clever man and his films are all OPINION- he has even pointed out himself that he just puts his opinions across- so people believe what they want.

Personaly I think people should take what he says with a pinch of salt.

People that constantly say things bad about him cant get their heads round the fact how much everything is messed up ( not just in America- everywhere).

I cant comment on F911 as i ahvent seen it



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join