Fahrenheit 9/11

H

Hutchy

At the Start
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
53
Location
Hua Hin, Thailand
Did anyone else see the above movie by Michael Moore on Channel 4 last night.
I have to admit to being gobsmacked by the revelations.
Was this a spoof movie because if not how the hell did Dubya get a second term.
If it was a spoof I was well and truly hoodwinked.
 
I really dislike him. I don't like the look of him. I don't like what he does. I don't agree with his views. I think that he sucks.


'Dirty Harry' star Clint Eastwood told an awards ceremony in New York that he would "kill" 'Fahrenheit 9/11' filmmaker Michael Moore if he ever showed up at his front door with a camera, according to a report on Ananova.com.

With Moore sitting in the audience, the Eastwood said: "Michael Moore and I actually have a lot in common - we both appreciate living in a country where there's free expression.

"But, Michael, if you ever show up at my front door with a camera — I'll kill you. I mean it."
 
Michaal Moore has lots of critics and I believe to some extent if he was broadcasting anything truly sensational, he wouldnt be allowed to do so. He is not as ground-breaking as he likes to think that he is. Lots of people who read newspapers and follow the news can pick up these trends as they come along.

However, i think it is better that there is someone willing to do what Moore does, and even with skillful editing, it is very interesting to have to have Colin Powell saying that Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat, the piece on John Ashcroft was very interesting also. Its a better place that someone does do what Moore does. Have never seen Fox News but from what Ive read and the clips shown, it appears to be as close to a real life "Brasseye" on TV.

I dont get Terry, why you are using Clint Eastwood to bolster your argument. I dont particularly like Michael Moore, and there are as many willing to believe his propoganda as easily as those believing Fox News, but are you suggesting that you would act the same as Clint should Moore arrive at your door. I see Clint didnt give a reason for his hatred.
 
The only reason I posted the Eastwood piece was because I doubt that some people round here realise how much hatred Moore can command.

Sure it was a fairly stupid thing for Eastwood to have said. He's a prat for not taking him out there and then! :D
 
and ignoring the important facts which are presented in the film (not views or opinions, but facts) due to a personal dislike of the presenter is exactly the reason why George W Bush is stll President.
 
I would never watch the film simmo because for me Moore has no integrity whatsoever.

I am sure that I can establish the truth without watching opportunistic twaddle like that.
 
Well i thought it was shit just a film about Bush who the producer hates and found all the bad things he could and placed them on the film. What about all the good things Bush has done for the world none of them were mentioned.
 
Bush has enough people pointing out the good things he's done already. What good things were they by the way, I may have missed them? (Seriously)
 
I've thought of one. He managed to oust the evil dictator Saddam Hussein from power. That would go down as a good thing.

I would certainly like to see more of this sort of activity. In fact I believe that a US, British and Spanish consortium has already made two attempts on the life of another evil dictator in Equatorial Guinea.

I look forward to the day when an evil dictator without any oil resources to hand is overthrown by the US. Honestly I do.

I may be waiting a while though.
 
Well I read that piece Terry but it was nothing more than a personal tirade.
It's all very well for someone like Christopher Hutchins to call it hogwash but I didn't see one instance where he actually produced facts that made Moore out to be a liar.
It may well be selective editing but it was sure as hell fascinating stuff.
 
Interesting piece, where the writer does exactly what he accuses Michael Moore of doing. Do you hate him too Terry? The only area where he creates anything like a coherent counter-argument is in the piece about Saddam. I have said above that I agreed that his downfall was a good thing, so I can't disagree with the chap there.

Dismissing facts out of hand because you don't like them or saying that you are counter-arguing against yourself (is that not balance?) does not make a piece against something any stronger. Quite the opposite in fact, I was interested to see if this chap could come up with any counter-claims and evidence which suggested that anything which was said in the film was untrue.

He has not, and I must therefore conclude, that this is because he cannot.
 
A little off topic but ...

I can't understand why programs like this one have to show images of mangled bodies and mutilated children. They did give a warning that it was coming, so I had the option to switch off, but I was interested in the program so stayed put. It's not that I am particularly squeamish or anything, these images are unpleasant for everybody. I know what happens in war, I'm no more educated or informed for having seen them. No point is enhanced by the presence of these images, so why show them?
 
I would reckon that the majority of people would be further educated and informed for seeing them. Although I may be doing the "majority" of people a huge dis-service there.

Although your point does put me in mind of an argument I had with a chap once about whether it would be worse to be living through the Second World War or through the threat of a nuclear war. I must have put my point to him rather too forcefully mind you, cause he threw me out of his house minutes later.
 
Originally posted by simmo@Jan 28 2005, 03:30 PM
Although your point does put me in mind of an argument I had with a chap once about whether it would be worse to be living through the Second World War or through the threat of a nuclear war. I must have put my point to him rather too forcefully mind you, cause he threw me out of his house minutes later.
Click to expand...
no contest no was real the other preceived.
 
Simmo, I don't understand you. If you agree with Moore then fine but from my perspective Hutchins rubbishes the whole framework within which Moore has constructed his film.

What else is he to do? Moore made the film and has to answer its critics, of which there are many. Hutchins has demolished and dismissed him and is right to do so. The guy looks, thinks and acts like a baby.

I mean, anybody could do what Moore has done about any political subject that you can think of. You can dress it up smart but the basics of what he did are what makes him so objectionable.
 
Simmo, with regard to the other question, surely you were comparing an experience like living through WW2 with an experience like the threat of a nuclear war?

Surely they are comparable?
 
With regard to the criticism of the way the film has been made, I must confess I wasn't overly interested. I was interested in the points being made (not how they were made) and was hoping that this Hutchins chappie would have some productive counter-argument against those points.

To illustrate one of my points. As a person, Paul McCartney and John Lennon both come across as being right nobbers (IMO). But I cant dispute that both of them have made some wonderful music. You might not like his methods, but can you dispute his points?

Re the other one, my suggestion was that living through an experience where you are say, standing next to your best friend one minute and the next have your best friends brains all over your face and the wall behind you and thousands upon thousands of equally scared people who have been given guns are trying to add your brains to the wall, would be much worse than standing next to your best friend saying "You know, I'm really concerned about the possibility that they might press the button sometime soon. Shall we have another pint?".
 
Originally posted by terry@Jan 28 2005, 03:57 PM


Surely they are comparable?
Click to expand...
dont know if anyone on here has lived thro' both periods but i can guess what those that have done so would say.
 
Back
Top