Michael Moore Responds

[U2Kitten]

zing!

i've done hours of community service, donated to numerous charities, etc. etc. etc. i don't need to brag about this, so i don't need to list exactly what I have done to make this world a better place. I know it in my HEART.

Me too! Good for you, and good for not tooting your own horn and dissing and judging others

 

[UltraVioletMofo]

For all of you who live to criticize -

the day that you can win international film awards for your movies, let alone an Oscar
and
when you can show me a lifetime of work standing up for the rights of the unemployed and the disenfranchised,

or, in simple terms,
when you can show me something that you have ACTUALLY DONE to make this world a better place (not just for Republicans)

THEN I will fathom that you have the credibility to criticize Michael Moore!

In other words, first talk to the man in the mirror.

1) Not once but twice this man has made films and gobs of money from other peoples agony. WAKE UP and stop giving the fat man more of your hard earned dollars. He eats well enough as we all can see.
2) Tell me how helping divide a country even more so than it already is with his latest filck a better place?
3) Tell me how making a film about a horrible day in a school did any good for anyone and how it changed the world? If anything it forced the parents and families to relive that horrible day again and again.
4) He only started standing up for the so-called unemployed and disenfranchised because he thought it would garner more votes for the bush haters. Ever heard of praying on the weak?

hes peeling off those dollar bills and slapping them down... All the way to the bank because its so easy to manipulate you.

 

[Irvine511]

1) Not once but twice this man has made films and gobs of money from other peoples agony. WAKE UP and stop giving the fat man more of your hard earned dollars. He eats well enough as we all can see.
2) Tell me how helping divide a country even more so than it already is with his latest filck a better place?
3) Tell me how making a film about a horrible day in a school did any good for anyone and how it changed the world? If anything it forced the parents and families to relive that horrible day again and again.
4) He only started standing up for the so-called unemployed and disenfranchised because he thought it would garner more votes for the bush haters. Ever heard of praying on the weak?

hes peeling off those dollar bills and slapping them down... All the way to the bank because its so easy to manipulate you.

my goodness.

1. it is precisely because of other people's agony that Moore makes movies -- he hopes he can affect political change through the most powerful popular medium of our time: filmmaking. you can disagree with the message, or the changes he wants to see, but you cannot disagree with either his right to do so, or with the sincerity of his intentions. yes, he's a bit of an ego show, but he's also dead serious about changing things. ... he's also a skillful enough filmmaker that if he wanted to make real money, he'd direct a feature starring Lindsay Lohan or something.

2. yes, we shouldn't ever question the power structure. we should do what Britney Spears says and just totally, like, trust our president to make the right decision. oh wait, we live in a democracy! and the price of democracy is eternal vigilance! you can disagree with Moore, but to criticize not what he says but the fact that he's saying something that rocks the boat, so to speak, is the antithesis of any modern, democratic society.

3. it got the nation talking about our culture of fear and how guns play into that. it was about the power of the NRA and how utterly crass they were to hold a gunshow in Denver a week or so after the slayings. it was about the sensationalistic nature of local news broadcasts and the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality that fuels the sale of handguns.

4. "roger and me" which is both his best film and film most concerned with the plight of the working class came out in 1989. at that time, GWB was a failed businessman living off the breaks his poppy's buddies gave him in texas.

i've seen all of Moore's films, and find him alternately brilliant and irritating. but at least he's acting like a real citizen in a democracy and fighting back against what he doesn't agree with. if you don't like it, don't buy a movie ticket.

 

[diamond]

irriating?-yes.
entertaining? yes a little.
manipulating? absolutely.

db9

 

[verte76]

Yes, Michael Moore is irritating, but he's also a talented film-maker who is using his talent to promote change in this country. Anyone who gets out there and takes any sort of stand on hot-button issues of war and peace is going to catch a bunch of flack. Not everyone will like you. I know plenty of people around here hate Moore. That's no surprise and I have no problem with that. The guy is indeed controversial as hell. But honestly, I'm glad that there are people in this society who aren't afraid to be controversial and express their feelings.

 

[Irvine511]

Yes, Michael Moore is irritating, but he's also a talented film-maker who is using his talent to promote change in this country. Anyone who gets out there and takes any sort of stand on hot-button issues of war and peace is going to catch a bunch of flack. Not everyone will like you. I know plenty of people around here hate Moore. That's no surprise and I have no problem with that. The guy is indeed controversial as hell. But honestly, I'm glad that there are people in this society who aren't afraid to be controversial and express their feelings.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Michael Moore is irritating, but he's also a talented film-maker who is using his talent to promote change in this country.

I agree entirely with that, thankyou Michael Moore for were it not for your zany conspiracy theories and dragging the democrats to the left there may have been a Kerry victory.

P.S. Thankyou very much for your endorsement of Hillary.

 

[verte76]

I really don't think Michael Moore had anything to do with the election results. If anyone dragged the Democrats to the left, it was Howard Dean, not Michael Moore. The idea of a film changing the course of an election is pretty laughable IMO (my opinions are not really humble) And now Dean is seriously considering a bid for the chairmanship of the DNC. Of course that would knock him out of electoral politics, but if things go as I predict and Iraq goes to hell in a haybasket of religious extremism, some of his ideas might be attractive in four years, and meanwhile he might find us some more candidates.

 

[Zoocoustic]

Michael Moore???

OH YEAH! That guy who gave the election to Bush...

 

[adam's_mistress]

Well said, Irvine!!!

And please. Michael Moore, such the perfect scapegoat, yes? I haven't heard one democrat blame Michael Moore for Kerry not winning the election. So why are conservatives so quick to to place the blame on behalf of the democrats? You're not doing anyone any favors. First it was conservatives who were oh-so-worried that Michael Moore would pull people to the left with his film and take votes from Bush. So worried in fact, that the loudest cheers from the RNC came when Moore was being denounced. Now Michael Moore is being thanked because his "plan" to sway people to the left backfired and Bush won.

Sure people came out in droves to see Fahrenheit 9/11. It was unsettling for a lot of people who think Moore was actually a threat. Come on. Michael Moore was preaching to the choir by the time that film came out. Whether or not some of you think he's nothing more than a fat manipulative windbag, he is an alternative voice for people tired of the seeming one-sidedness we've been fed by the mainstream media over the past 4 years. I don't think a whole lot of minds were changed - as a matter of fact, minds about Moore were made up up long before Fahrenheit hit theaters.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I don't know what is funnier, MM being disowned by some of his former true believers or the backpedalling about F9/11 being a film to change an election.

This isn't to anybody specific but the way that the movie was being sold at the time and its treatment now - it's like a pariah film.

 

[Clark W. Griswold Jr]

Maybe Mike's next film will be the Ohio State University's "underhanded" recruitment of Ted Ginn, Jr. C'mon Mikey, there's a conspiracy there somewhere!!!

 

[blueyedpoet]

The arguments against Michael Moore thus far:
1) he's a windbag (what is this?)
2) he eats a lot
3) he's rich
4) he doesn't have integrity
5) he's silly
Therefore, his movies must contain nothing but lies and propaganda. Can anyone tell me how this conclusion follows from the premises?
The formula being used is:
a
+
b
+
c
=
z.....we're talking about simple logic here people. Please back up your claims with facts.

 

[blueyedpoet]

Forgive my spelling error.

 

[nbcrusader]

The arguments against Michael Moore thus far:
1) he's a windbag (what is this?)
2) he eats a lot
3) he's rich
4) he doesn't have integrity
5) he's silly
Therefore, his movies must contain nothing but lies and propaganda. Can anyone tell me how this conclusion follows from the premises?
The formula being used is:
a
+
b
+
c
=
z.....we're talking about simple logic here people. Please back up your claims with facts.

There are multiple threads about Moore. Go back and review for the facts.

 

[blueyedpoet]

Oh I have read many different threads. I get that you all think that he is fat and stupid. While I cannot argue about the fat condition, I take issue with him being regarded as a liar and stupid. Please, cite one example of a lie he has told. And, it better be at least somewhat documented to the degree that he documents his shit. If anyone noticed, at first Fox and other networks had their pundits saying F 9/11 was made up of lies. After he threatened lawsuits, the word lie was changed to propaganda. And, that I'll give you. His latest movie is not a geniune documentary - it's opinion.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Fine you want a lie, how about the "headline" of the Bloomington Pantagraph that said latest recount shows Gore victory, this was actually an op-ed piece and it was never ever a headline, the paper shown in the movie was a fabrication.
The F9/11 view

the actual piece

The bullshit about the Saudi's being allowed to fly out of the country while airspace was restricted. This did not happen and when they did fly out (after airspace was reopened) it was Richard Clark that authorised it, all in the 9.11 commission.

>Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998.
>Moore mentions that the Taliban visited Texas while Bush was governor, over a possible pipeline deal with Unocal. But Moore doesn't say that they never actually met with Bush or that the deal went bust in 1998 and had been supported by the Clinton administration.
>Saddam Hussein Iraq "had never attacked the United States. A nation that had never threatened to attack the United States. A nation that had never murdered a single American citizen.". Now does this not overlook the attempts to down Fighter Planes during the peace, assassination attempt on former President Bush, sanctuary for the WTC Bombers how about the thousands of dollars given to suicide homocide bombers who most definitely did murder American civilians. Saddam was complicit in the murder of Americans

How about a distortion, take this quote from the National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice that was partially used in the film (in bold).

“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”

Chrisopher Hitchens had it right when he wrote

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723

 

[Dreadsox]

Ya beat me to it...LOL

 

[speedracer]

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

 

[verte76]

This is a matter of personal preference and political views. If you're like me and pessimistic about the situation in Iraq, and now pessimistic in general, F9/11 was flawed but not trash. There were certainly weak spots in the film. For example, he said Hamid Karzai got in in Afghanistan because he was a former consultant for one of the Bush-connected businesses. This probably didn't hurt, but the Afghans who had that meeting in Germany chose him. They didn't have to. Karzai has pretty good credentials as an Afghan/Pashtun nationalist, and had been fighting the Taliban since the U.S. offensive started after 9/11. There are other flaws in the film that it's too early in the morning to think of.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

from Variety..

Michael Moore met with Harvey Weinstein and Moore says they plan to start working -- now -- on "Fahrenheit 9/11½." "We want to get cameras rolling now and have it ready in two-three years," Moore says. "We want to document and commercialize it. Fifty-one percent of the American people lacked information (in this election) and we want to educate and enlighten them. They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now. The official mourning period is over today and there is a silver lining -- George W. Bush is prohibited by law from running again." And as for those who claim that Hollywood was an albatross on the Democrats' neck, Moore says, "America loves Hollywood. When given a chance to vote for someone from Hollywood, they jump in." He cited the history of successful Republican actor-politicians from George Murphy to Ronnie Reagan to Arnold. "Who is the Democrats' Arnold? We have a number of them. What American wouldn't vote for Tom Hanks? Hollywood is full of people like that." When I asked what actor would trade a $20 million salary and a percentage of the gross, he countered with "Let's pay the actor-politicians a presidential salary of $20 million -- plus a percentage of the GNP." He says "Hollywood gets a chance for one more vote this year": Moore and Harvey are going ahead on the Oscar campaign for "Fahrenheit 9/11" in best picture and other applicable categories. Harvey told him, "Let's do it. And I said 'whatever Harvey wants, I'm ready.'" He isn't bothered by the absence of suitable category for a Golden Globe nomination --" We're not a musical, comedy or dramatic feature." He laughingly admits, "I don't know if people want to see me on the stage of the Kodak again. However, since my wife (Kathleen) was the producer, if I win -- she speaks!". Thousands of the "Fahrenheit" DVDs have been donated to libraries and schools. He gave them away on his trek through 63 cities in the past month -- they included stops in Ohio and Florida. The issues (for the next film) have not changed because of the election. "They are Iraq and terrorism." He says he continues to get mail from the armed forces telling of their disappointments." I asked about his hate mail? "There's very little. It's dropped down to a few drive-by gloaters." And yes, he'll continue preparing his other film, "Sicko," on the national health care industry.

 

[nbcrusader]

This is a matter of personal preference and political views.

Perhaps the subjective enjoyment of Moore's works, but the veracity in which he conducts his work is not a matter of personal preference.

 

[verte76]

Perhaps the subjective enjoyment of Moore's works, but the veracity in which he conducts his work is not a matter of personal preference.

Yes, I was mainly referring to subjective enjoyment of his stuff. He's a very good manipulator of images, which is basically what any good film-maker is. I pointed out that he gave a one-sided view of Hamid Karzai, and that's not a subjective thing, he quite clearly didn't say anything about the election of the Afghan representatives in Germany or Karzai's spotless nationalist credentials, which include fighting through a tough battle for control of Kandahar after getting hit. That's what U.S. soldiers get Purple Hearts for.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

There is more integrity here in the pinky of some of the posters in here than Michael Moore has, and that alone gives a majority of the posters in here the right to criticize Michael Moore.

Agreed, I feel that Michael Moore hurt the dems this election with his far-left babble overlapping the moderates. Not that I hate the guy, but many people feel that his facts are made up, and I'm not convinced that he's as truthful as the media claims he is.

 

[blueyedpoet]

Ok, here's my first response to the so-called lie. I'm not sure why Moore distorted the headline from a letter, when it would have been just as easy to post:
A] consortium [Tribune Co., owner of the Times; Associated Press; CNN; the New York Times; the Palm Beach Post; the St. Petersburg Times; the Wall Street Journal; and the Washington Post] hired the NORC [National Opinion Research Center, a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with the University of Chicago] to view each untallied ballot and gather information about how it was marked. The media organizations then used computers to sort and tabulate votes, based on varying scenarios that had been raised during the post-election scramble in Florida. Under any standard that tabulated all disputed votes statewide, Mr. Gore erased Mr. Bush's advantage and emerged with a tiny lead that ranged from 42 to 171 votes. Donald Lambro, “Recount Provides No Firm Answers,” Washington Times, November 12, 2001.

Moore to come...haha, oh what a terrible pun

 

[blueyedpoet]

Further:
FAHRENHEIT 9/11: “At least six private jets and nearly two dozen commercial planes carried the Saudis and the bin Ladens out of the U.S. after September 13th. In all, 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to leave the country.”

NOTE: It should be noted that even though the film does not make the allegation, strong evidence has recently come to light that at least one private plane flew to pick up Saudi nationals while private flights were still grounded. Moreover, for nearly three years, the White House has denied that this flight existed. This was reported in the June 9, 2004 St. Petersburg Times article cited below.

After the airspace reopened, six chartered flights with 142 people,mostly Saudi Arabian nationals, departed from the United States between September 14 and 24. One flight, the so-called Bin Ladin flight, departed the United States on September 20 with 26 passengers, most of them relatives of Usama Bin Ladin. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Threats and Responses in 2001, Staff Statement No. 10, The Saudi Flights, p. 12; http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/
hearing10/staff_statement_10.pdf
It should be noted that the US Customs and Border Protection document released by the Department of Homeland Security under the FOIA, Feb 24, 2004 lists 162 Saudi Nationals who flew out of the country between 9/11/2001 and 9/15/2001, departing from New York’s Kennedy airport, Washington’s Dulles, and Dallas Fort Worth. http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/
2004/homelandsecurity.pdf.
For an official list of Saudi Passport holders (names redacted) who flew out of the country between 9.11.2001 – 9.15.2001, see US Customs and Border Protection document released by the Department of Homeland Security under the FOIA, Feb 24, 2004; http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/
2004/homelandsecurity.pdf.
TheSt. Petersburg Times reported on Jun 9, 2004:
o "Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, with most of the nation's air traffic still grounded, a small jet landed at Tampa International Airport, picked up three young Saudi men and left. The men, one of them thought to be a member of the Saudi royal family, were accompanied by a former FBI agent and a former Tampa police officer on the flight to Lexington, Ky. The Saudis then took another flight out of the country.”

o Moreover: “For nearly three years, White House, aviation and law enforcement officials have insisted the flight never took place and have denied published reports and widespread Internet speculation about its purpose… The terrorism panel, better known as the 9/11 Commission, said in April that it knew of six chartered flights with 142 people aboard, mostly Saudis, that left the United States between Sept. 14 and 24, 2001. But it has said nothing about the Tampa flight… The 9/11 Commission, which has said the flights out of the United States were handled appropriately by the FBI, appears concerned with the handling of the Tampa flight.

o "Most of the aircraft allowed to fly in U.S. airspace on Sept. 13 were empty airliners being ferried from the airports where they made quick landings on Sept. 11. The reopening of the airspace included paid charter flights, but not private, nonrevenue flights.” Jean Heller, “TIA now verifies flight of Saudis; The government has long denied that two days after the 9/11 attacks, the three were allowed to fly.” St. Petersburg Times, June 9, 2004

 

[blueyedpoet]

"Saddam Hussein Iraq "had never attacked the United States. A nation that had never threatened to attack the United States. A nation that had never murdered a single American citizen.". Now does this not overlook the attempts to down Fighter Planes during the peace, assassination attempt on former President Bush, sanctuary for the WTC Bombers how about the thousands of dollars given to suicide homocide bombers who most definitely did murder American civilians. Saddam was complicit in the murder of Americans"

Being completely explicit, an attack requires a lot more than firing a couple of missles up in the air at jets. Providing sanctury hardly is an attack; nevertheless, I have beef with that point being brought up, prove it! You also need to prove that the money Saddam supplied to Hamas was used to blow up American citizens. How many US citizens have been killed by Palestinians? (Side note: I know Israel has run over at least three westerners with their tanks).
Did moore stretch things for more visual impact? Yes. But, the claims he makes are truthful. If they were not you can bet your ass there would be lawsuits instead of frivilous slate pieces.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Since the Oslo accords 36 American citizens have been murdered by Palestinian Arab Terrorists (24 since the year 2000). Also the ISM imbeciles who choose to "stand down" Israeli bulldozers like Corrie (or as some have dubbed her St. Pancake) are not just run over by Israel.

The claims are not truthful, they are misleading and ultimately dishonest claims that's validity rests on fine technicalities.

 

[blueyedpoet]

Thanks for the info concerning the 36 american lives. However, this does not constitute a war on Iraq. Frankly, we know that Saudi Arabia provides financial resources for terrorist groups. Further, they provide ground for terrorists to live. It was afterall, saudi's who attacked us on 9/11.
But I feel like arguing is pointless. I can provide sources backing up the claims Moore makes in his movie all day long, but you still claim they are lies.

 

[timbo15]

Well said, Irvine!!!

he is an alternative voice for people tired of the seeming one-sidedness we've been fed by the mainstream media over the past 4 years.

What is the seeming one-sidedness that I constantly hear about. I have a father-in-law who preaches this same mantra. This is yet another fabrication of the radical left. Stick to real issues. I have been a Bush supporter, but I don't really like what is going on in Iraq. However, Kerry never came up with any real plan on how to do the job differently. Plus, when it comes to conservative social issues it is obvious that Kerry loses that battle.