Michael Moore couldn't fool Pete Townshend - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-17-2004, 11:31 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Seabird
Well a "good" or "bad" American will not be shot of speaking his mind. Let me rephrase. What I meant was he didn't like the government. In some places you will be killed for criticizing your leaders. So if he thinks our LEADERS are so bad he should move to a country whose LEADERS will shoot you for criticizing them.
I don't think we have to go that extreme. If he thinks our leaders are so bad, he can continue to make movies and cast a vote against them.

And if people disagree, they can continue to not see his films or criticize them and vote for Bush in the coming election. It's that simple, and both sides are guilty of histrionics when it comes to politics. I guess that is my point really.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:59 AM   #32
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,662
Local Time: 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Seabird
Well a "good" or "bad" American will not be shot of speaking his mind. Let me rephrase. What I meant was he didn't like the government. In some places you will be killed for criticizing your leaders. So if he thinks our LEADERS are so bad he should move to a country whose LEADERS will shoot you for criticizing them.
If any view is unAmerican it's this point of view. Being American does not mean to put up with what you have. America was built upon the fact that people questioned those that governed over them...have we forgotten this? So no one needs to move. That is not America. No matter what his views are, he's allowed to express them and he's allowed to live and be proud he's American. Who are you to tell anyone to leave?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-18-2004, 03:52 AM   #33
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 940
Local Time: 10:24 PM
F9/11 only just opened here in Australia over this weekend. I saw it Friday night.

It's biased, it's dumbed down, it makes extremely simplistic conclusions on very, very complicated subjects.

I find it hilarious that so many US Conservatives are spending so much of their energy trying to discredit it because it is those things, then they'll go home and get in front of the tv and cheer on Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or any of the other biased, dumbed down, simplistic fools on Fox.

Can they honestly not see that they are the EXACT same thing, just sitting on different sides of the political fence, and the Fox regulars have a MUCH larger audience than Michael Moore's movie will. And who do you think is more dangerous? The ones demanding unwavering, unquestioning support for a government driving it's country to war after war, or the one who is demanding that people ask questions and get answers?

I think you all should get together and demand more intelligence from your media.
__________________
TylerDurden is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 12:09 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Re: Michael Moore couldn't fool Pete Townshend

Quote:
Originally posted by BluberryPoptart
Pete refused to let Moore use "Won't Get Fooled Again" in F-911 because he did not approve and did not trust Moore.

Moore has made a living out of using authentic clips to intentionally mislead people into thinking something is true. In my opinion, he is doing the equivalent of taking a quote out of context.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 01:22 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by TylerDurden
It's biased, it's dumbed down, it makes extremely simplistic conclusions on very, very complicated subjects.

I find it hilarious that so many US Conservatives are spending so much of their energy trying to discredit it because it is those things, then they'll go home and get in front of the tv and cheer on Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or any of the other biased, dumbed down, simplistic fools on Fox.

Can they honestly not see that they are the EXACT same thing, just sitting on different sides of the political fence, and the Fox regulars have a MUCH larger audience than Michael Moore's movie will. And who do you think is more dangerous? The ones demanding unwavering, unquestioning support for a government driving it's country to war after war, or the one who is demanding that people ask questions and get answers?

I think you all should get together and demand more intelligence from your media.
I find myself making this argument the most, but I think you've articulated better than I have thus far. As for whether we'll find the answers, the cynicism of postmodernism tells me that we won't. Even if the answers are sitting right in front of us, we'd likely dismiss it as not being "balanced" enough. The messenger has become more important than the message it seems, and perhaps not unjustifiably.

And you're right on the mark. Liberals and conservatives are guilty of exactly the same things, in terms of rhetoric, and that's why I find this hoopla about Michael Moore to be nothing more than empty rhetoric, except that, with each successive turn, the vitriol of the rhetoric gets worse. Conservatives had no problem at all bashing the Clinton Administration to levels that, in some moments, paled in comparison to how liberals bash Bush. Yet, liberals are "un-American" for criticizing Bush. I'm sure that the tables will turn if Kerry gets elected; suddenly, conservatives will talk about how "American" it is to criticize their leadership and how they have First Amendment protections to do so. Suddenly, they'll become the greatest champions of the Bill of Rights!

But shifting from postmodernism to Marxist "hegemony," I cannot help but notice that, outside of the rhetoric, the two parties have almost the exact same positions. Both the Democrats and the Republicans, for instance, are officially against gay marriage; they just differ on how much it should be banned. :P Further tax cuts are likely going to happen, even if it is likely irresponsible. It just really depends on where it will go, and, even then, in both instances, tax cuts are meaningless. People will still complain that they pay too much. And the "war on terror"...it won't go away. Kerry and Bush will likely end up doing the same things; Bush just colors his rhetoric in bombastic colors, but, rest assured, there won't be another war at least until after Afghanistan and Iraq are cleaned up, which may take another year or two.

And right in the middle of it all is the muckraking media. For those who paid attention at all to U.S. History in school, newspaper magnate, William Randolph Hearst, is not portrayed in a positive light, due to how he invented the Spanish-American War and passed off tabloid rumors as "news." Yet, this is *exactly* what American media is today! Our news is about as real as "reality television," and we will only hear what will get good ratings. Question the accuracy of "Bowling for Columbine" all one wants, but the thing I got the most out of it was just how American media thrives on fear. I cannot watch television news anymore, because I'm tired of being told to be afraid of something, whether it be terrorists or some food that *may* cause cancer, and, yet, when these studies are disproved, there is *never* a follow-up. Fear...fear...fear...fear...and anyone who tries to call it out will essentially be challenging the dominant hegemony's manner of remaining in power, and, thus, you will be deemed subversive or "anti-American." That's what it boils down to.

I really don't know if F911 is mostly contrived or not, merely because I trust none of the sources to tell me, one way or another. Back to postmodernism, Jean Baudrillard's "The Gulf War Did Not Exist" is a great book on this subject, arguing that the "reality" of the war was solely presented to us on how the media fed it to us; thus, since the media is fake, the war "does not exist" to us outside of these images. We trust that Iraq exists merely because we are told it exists, but how accurate are these messages we receive? People who take the title too literally will balk at the book likely, but it's great postmodern theory. In other words, we can't trust our media to tell us the "Truth," because "Truth" does not exist through subjective ("human") sources, and since it is impossible for us to discover everything first-hand, the quest for "Truth" is impossible.

Ahhhh...why didn't I just go to culinary school? I could have been a good French chef methinks. :P

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 01:39 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:24 PM
So we can trust Michael Moore to use medical records with a name blacked out, which is required by LAW, to paint it as something synister as in the President is trying to hide something?

WE can trust that Michael Moore will make issue of a supposed link through the Carlyse group to Bush as a Bin Laden connection, when George Soros also has ties to the same group?

We can trust that Michael Moore will make an issue of the Thaliban coming to Texas to discuss a pipleine, but not point out that Bush NEVER met with them while members of the Clinton Administration did, or to put into the film that it was the Clinton Administration that was seeking the pipeline.

WE can trust that Mr. Moore will not publicize that it was Richard Clarke who authorized the Saudis/Bin Ladens be allowed to leave, or that they did not leave until AFTER the flights out of the contry were resumed, but that they were allowed to fly within the country on August 13 to get to the airport that had the international flights on August 14th, the same day that flights were resuming. He will not publicize that the family of Bin Laden was background checked long before 9/11 when they entered the country. He will not publicize that there were investigations into at least 30 of the Saudis before they left the country.

And yes, maybe I am wasting my time researching the flaws....but I do find it quite interesting how documents and footage can be used to lead someone astray.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 01:41 PM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:24 PM
PS excuse my spelling ect...I am in a migrane spell.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:12 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,277
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

But shifting from postmodernism to Marxist "hegemony," I cannot help but notice that, outside of the rhetoric, the two parties have almost the exact same positions.
But this is not some earth shattering new realization.

Ralph Nader has been screaming to the heavens about this for years and years and nobody seems to be listening. Any non-American will tell you as much at first glance, and as one of those, I have no idea how you people vote for one party over the other when it comes to issues alone, as they are very similar. In fact, Michael Moore argues this same thing in his books, often saying that the difference between Republicans and Democrats is that the Republicans will screw you outright, while the Democrats will smile and then screw you. Same thing in the end.

I don't believe any effective change will come to the US Government until you move beyond this antiquated 2-party system that even the most backwards 2nd and even some 3rd world countries have left behind eons ago.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:48 PM   #39
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 108
Local Time: 10:24 PM
The reason that the two-party system survives and no third party can compete is that most people believe one party promises something that is a priority for that person. This person is willing sacrafice some issues for other issues that are more important to him or her. Only two parties are powerful enough to defend these central issues. And as no party will follow someone's ideology perfectly, it doesn't make sense to support a weak party that really can't defend your issues.

As for there being almost no difference between the two major parties, that's not really true.
__________________
FullonEdge is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 04:26 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 10:24 PM
Moore hates the government, and more specifically the Bush Administration. I didn't get the impression that he hates the country at all.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 07:36 PM   #41
War Child
 
BluberryPoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 532
Local Time: 10:24 PM
I have not seen this because it is not playing where I live. Everyonen I talk to who has seen it seems to lean the way of Sting2 or Tyler. This is sensationalistic crap with no basis you guys eat up because you hate Bush. It's a joke.
__________________
BluberryPoptart is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 08:39 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 10:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BluberryPoptart
I have not seen this because it is not playing where I live. Everyonen I talk to who has seen it seems to lean the way of Sting2 or Tyler. This is sensationalistic crap with no basis you guys eat up because you hate Bush. It's a joke.
It's bits and pieces with a hell of alot left out.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 09:39 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 11:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BluberryPoptart
I have not seen this because it is not playing where I live. Everyonen I talk to who has seen it seems to lean the way of Sting2 or Tyler. This is sensationalistic crap with no basis you guys eat up because you hate Bush. It's a joke.
First of all, I (Earnie) am Tyler. Long story as to why I'm Earnie... anyway...

You might have missed my point there...

There are 2 points I guess.

a) that I have no problem with the debate over Moore's film, the information in it and the conclusions drawn from it. That's all good and I encourage it, BUT I think conservatives just trying to shout him down as the spawn of satan simply because he has made a biased film are being extremely hypocritical. Michael Moore is debating Fox on their turf in the style they chose. Dumbed down, incredibly biased, sensationalistic crap thats aimed at a generation of people with a short attention span who follow the leader too easily (by that I mean, no independant thought, and no time for complex debate or research themselves - give it to me quickly and make it entertaining). There is clearly a huge market for it in the US which people like Fox, Rush etc have expoited for a long time, and just like in any market, sooner or later there's going to be competition. This is where Michael Moore comes in.

b) I think it's a real shame that for issues such as this, which are extremely complex (terrorism, why the west is hated, the war on terror, war against Iraq etc etc) that there are going to be a massive amount of Americans going to vote, making their decisions based on "What Fox News told me" versus "What Michael Moore told me". I mean, what was that statistic, something crazy like 80% of Americans believed Iraq was behind 9/11? Now where do you think they got that idea from? And if the ideas in Michael Moore's movie caught on in mainstream US thinking, maybe 80% may believe that 9/11 happened simply because of Bush family connections? Both are crazy, dangerous and very deliberate.

If you vote for Bush based on Fox type hype and the beliefs and information they present, you are a stupid, dumba*se monkey.
If you vote against Bush based on Moore type hype and the beliefs and information they present, you are the same.
However, thats the environment I think you've created in your country and I'm afraid that's how the majority will vote.
Made even more of a shame because there are dozens of intelligent, legitimate reasons for giving Bush the boot.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 10:24 PM   #44
War Child
 
BluberryPoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 532
Local Time: 10:24 PM
Earnie/Tyler, I brought up your post as well as Sting's for the 2 kinds of views I'm hearing from friends, I didn't mean yours and his were the same. The one I don't buy is the one that it's all true and factual and that Moore has really busted the case wide open! I think ppl who buy that only do so because they want to.
__________________
BluberryPoptart is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 10:51 AM   #45
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 11:24 PM
Michael Moore borders on propaganda
I'd guess he isn't actually worse than any given campaign add by Bush or Kerry though

the man gets too much hype which he doesn't even has to work for
__________________

__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com