Debunking Feirhenlies 9/11

**Conservative Front** · Jul 2nd, 2004 12:10 AM

This is part one of my debunks for this propaganda.

1) When Michael Moore asked Congressman (damn I forgot his name but he was a republican) If he'd like to sign up and said no and thats where moore ended it however the Congressman Explained to him that he already had a Nephew in the war so he has family in the war but interesting enough Michael Moore lies about it....

2) Michael Moore proclaims that most of the deaths in the war where of minority groups well that's an interesting statement considering that 70% of the fallen where white.

3) Michael Moore Proclaims there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam well I think thats be fairly debunked now.

this is just a small portion of my debunkering I'll write more soon but I think even thus far it's enough to show that this film is plain and simple Propaganda and I'm still curious when he's going to film the Soliders that accutally support the war instead of infecting people with extreme liberal views.

***lotrfan55345*** · Jul 2nd, 2004 5:30 AM

About the "proven connection" between 9/11 and Saddam, you were the one that was pwned by MM on that... There is no connection, look at his reply on one of these threads with links...

***DontBeAfraid*** · Jul 2nd, 2004 5:56 AM

You will be hard pressed to find any soldier who is truely excited about possibly dying in iraq or any country.

***stewey*** · Jul 2nd, 2004 6:47 AM

You will be hard pressed to find a soldier who is truely excited about possibly dying anywhere. You will be hard pressed to find a person who is truely excited about dying. Asides from lunatic suicide bombers and terminally ill people.

**MetalMilitia** · Jul 2nd, 2004 7:03 AM

1) When Michael Moore asked Congressman (damn I forgot his name but he was a republican) If he'd like to sign up and said no and thats where moore ended it however the Congressman Explained to him that he already had a Nephew in the war so he has family in the war but interesting enough Michael Moore lies about it....

It's not lies, it's tricky editing. If you had read into Michael Moore a little more, and watched any of his previous films, you would realize how good of a "spinster" he is.

2) Michael Moore proclaims that most of the deaths in the war where of minority groups well that's an interesting statement considering that 70% of the fallen where white.

Links, Links, Links please.

3) Michael Moore Proclaims there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam well I think thats be fairly debunked now.

Got a link for me? I'd love to read it. Don't you think if we had the proof, they MIGHT HAVE CHARGED SADDAM themselves... rather than turn 'em over for an Iraqi trial? I think the Americans (having absoloute proof) would have taken him in on our own charges for 9/11, seeing as how we held him since last December.

this is just a small portion of my debunkering I'll write more soon but I think even thus far it's enough to show that this film is plain and simple Propaganda and I'm still curious when he's going to film the Soliders that accutally support the war instead of infecting people with extreme liberal views.

Have fun countering propaganda with more proaganda.... you know they do call this a "documentary" but it is also a movie, based on what one man thinks... it's not like he speaks for everyone.

-MM-

**Moishe3rd** · Jul 2nd, 2004 7:56 AM

I understand that one premise of the movie is that President Bush went to war in Iraq to support his relationship with Osama; the Saudis; and / or oil interests.

I understand that one implication was how happy the Iraqis were under Saddam.

I understand that one implication is that our military forces and there families are very unhappy about us going into Iraq.

I understand that Moore presents this piece of crap as a documentary.

***stewey*** · Jul 2nd, 2004 8:48 AM

Yeah, I am going to retire from political forums I think. It is just mud slinging with rhetoric and propaganda and sources and polls that support your idea.

**Emerald_Dragon** · Jul 2nd, 2004 3:38 PM

>I understand that one premise of the movie is that President Bush
>went to war in Iraq to support his relationship with Osama;
> the Saudis; and / or oil interests.

I don't think it was to support his relationship with OBL, I don't think there is one (i could be wrong).

I do believe he's got connections to the Saudis via the Carlyle Group and that this war will make him/his family rich(er). I also believe he's been funded by the Saudi's so will likely do things that benefit them. Like excluding 28 pages mentioning their involvement in 911 and [maybe] pointing them in the right direction of who to talk to in order to get their friends out of the U.S. post-911 [/conjecture].

I think Bush got us in Iraq because of Cheney/PNAC/Rove. For his part, his wealth grows. So I don't think I hate Bush, he's Christian and so am I.

>Yeah, I am going to retire from political forums I think.

that may be a good thing. you don't need people telling you your opinions aren't substantiated. and you might learn things you'd prefer not to know about. cyaz.

***stewey*** · Jul 2nd, 2004 4:58 PM

People may think they're unsubstantiated because they do not agree with them. In fact, I think many peoples opinions are not substantiated, but it is their right to have the opinion.

Agroblade · Jul 2nd, 2004 5:36 PM

Originally Posted by stewey

People may think they're unsubstantiated because they do not agree with them. In fact, I think many peoples opinions are not substantiated, but it is their right to have the opinion.

Well said, I'm getting tired of this "only I can be right" attitude too. But I would remind you that conflict breeds creativity as well.

***substand*** · Jul 3rd, 2004 12:53 AM

Originally Posted by metalmilitia

It's not lies, it's tricky editing. ... you know they do call this a "documentary" but it is also a movie, based on what one man thinks...

It can't be "tricky editing" and "what [he] thinks" at the same time. If he thinks something, he wouldn't need to use "tricky editing" to show what he thinks. He would think it based on the truth, not based on what he can edit the truth to sound like.

stewey, I think the problem with what you posted comes in the form of:

"It is just mud slinging with rhetoric and propaganda and sources and polls that support your idea."

What else is any conversation? Mudslinging with rhetoric is just violent disagreement. But given "sources and polls that support your idea" (and the idea being "mudslinging with rhetoric"), what else is there?

You can have ideas on anything (be it politics, armageddon, ufos, etc), but you better have proof to back it up (ie sources and polls)... There is no truth besides truth, and the only way to arrive at "truth" in debatable matters (such as politics) is thru backing yourself thru polls (which are sources) and sources (and rhetoric). Even then it may not be truth, because someone may show a different source that proves your source wrong.

This is politics and political reality my friend. If you don't like it, by all means, talk about "oh my god, can you beleive becky wore that outfit yesterday?" gossip, and don't worry about politics. But politics needs, demands, deserves, and will eventually come to the truth by the very mechanisms you claim to abhor. If you don't like it, I welcome your candor and support your decision to leave. However, its always nice to have a fresh face around like yourself to argue a good new point. So if you stay, I say welcome. If you leave because of the things you said, then "good riddance."

Hopefully, stewey- I'd like to say welcome.

**Conservative Front** · Jul 3rd, 2004 1:43 AM

I don't think I was owned on it He didn't prove anything to me but his own opinion on the matter.
---end response to lotrfan---

He accepted his dutys and he knew the risks of becoming a solider when he signed up.
---end response to dontbeafriad---

True it is trickery edited but it's still lies and doesn't show the "truth" which Michael Moore proclaims it does it simply shows his "spin" of lies.

foxnews.com, and I think MSNBC had a little piece on this aswell check it out I know its on foxnews and i'm about 90% sure its on MSNBC.

Why would the American's charge Suddam, He didn't butcher are people with cyclosarin and It looks great to the world the directly after the transfer of sovernegty we would hand over the Iraq criminal to stand trial against his own people great great move.

Yeah, I realize that he doesn't speak for everyone but he trys to and he trys too. So why not debunk what I can?

---end respone to MM---

haha Nicely said Moishe3rd because you know Bush had a secret pipeline built if so i'm kind of curious as to why i'm still paying 1.99$ a Gallon

---end respone to Moishe---

***DontBeAfraid*** · Jul 3rd, 2004 9:22 AM

CF, I was simply responding to your outlandish statement that more soldiers who WANT/LIKE going to war in iraq should be interviewed. Dont tell me they knew the risks when they signed up because telling me that is OFF-TOPIC. Just admit that the reason more soldiers who LIKE war HAVENT been interviewed because they DONT EXIST.

***stewey*** · Jul 3rd, 2004 1:41 PM

Yeah, I am staying. What you said is totally correct. Anyways, I don't think there is much doubt on this forum about the authenticity of most of F911's claims.

**Conservative Front** · Jul 4th, 2004 12:31 AM

And the only Reason Michael Moore hand picked a few crop of soliders is so he could inflate is biased extreme liberal opinion, during the beginning of the war I remember Foxnews interviewing several soliders that supported the action and I was watching Gerlado the other night and he had a whole company with him in Iraq that supported the war or what about Oliver North? same deal.
---end response to dontbeafriad---

**Emerald_Dragon** · Jul 4th, 2004 1:17 PM

I'd like to see Fox interview those same soldiers to see how they feel now.

OTOH, i believe Fox would only air them if they didn't stray from what they originally said. And if they did, I would wonder if they would air them, at all. We already know their biased.

***VegasRonin*** · Jul 4th, 2004 7:16 PM

Most of our society's members who would like war are in our prisons. A true Warrior depletes all his options before physically engaging a person(s). One shouldn't confuse a Warrior with a Warmonger.

OTOH, i believe Fox would only air them if they didn't stray from what they originally said. And if they did, I would wonder if they would air them, at all. We already know their biased.

No one can realistically claim that FOX or CNN is not biased but I have seen FOX cover both sides (Those for and against). CNN, IMO, does not know the defintion of War (I know its not declared. What would you call it?).

And the only Reason Michael Moore hand picked a few crop of soliders is so he could inflate is biased extreme liberal opinion, during the beginning of the war I remember Foxnews interviewing several soliders that supported the action and I was watching Gerlado the other night and he had a whole company with him in Iraq that supported the war or what about Oliver North?

This statement, and the need for it, is funny to me. Anyone who had a Highschool debate class, knows that you present arguments/facts/people that reinforce your position. You're not going to present the other's evidence to wage your debate.

**Conservative Front** · Jul 5th, 2004 1:58 AM

Id say Foxnews does lean a bit right but for the most part they are balanced they always invite both sides to the debate.
---end response to emerald dragon---

I realize what your saying Vegas but at the same time Moore was claiming that most soliders where against the war and that is plain and simple Propaganda there is no excuse for it it's pure fabricated lies nothing more thats the point I was trying to make.
---end response to Vegas Ronin---

**humanhybrid** · Jul 5th, 2004 2:26 AM

Any soldier that has came out of boot camp does not know what he will feel when confronted with action and death, only that what has been drilled into him or her for survival. It changes a young man or woman. Any soldier that has been through it and has experienced it will have a change of heart. My step son will be leaving in 2 or three weeks to Iraq.

IT WILL BE A BAD and sad day!

***stewey*** · Jul 5th, 2004 3:00 AM

The media is actually pretty evenly here, compared to other countries. Fox news is more right than left, CNN seems more left than right. It's however the higher ups in the company want to do it.

***Defiant Noquisi*** · Jul 5th, 2004 3:14 AM

Originally Posted by substand

It can't be "tricky editing" and "what [he] thinks" at the same time. If he thinks something, he wouldn't need to use "tricky editing" to show what he thinks. He would think it based on the truth, not based on what he can edit the truth to sound like.

Im not quite sure what both you and MM mean in what you posted, I think I do. However, Im being anal and I know it. It is very possible to use "tricky editing" AND opinion. In the editing process, its cuts and fades are "tricks" to "glue" the story being spun together. In fact, the editing process is VERY opinionated since it is the final views of the director in conjunction with the director of cinematography that get pieced together into what you see in the theater or by rental. F911 is no different. (for Subs and MM)

For everyone;

Right or wrong, Moore is entitled to his opinion and to place it in the view of the public. Anyone that views this film as verbatim of actual fact is fooling themselves and deserve to be fooled. They can drown in their own stupidity. The majority of citizens have been so caught up in their own little piece of life that they have let the world and its politics just wander by without a care in the world about it.

If people are so pissed off by the politics of today that they actually go see it then great! Our economy is being well served and so are thousands of people who work in the entertainment industry who then spend money in other industry.

If people get so angry with Moore for leaving key facts out that they educate themselves with the truth then amazing! People have sat on their collective asses long enough and ignored what is happening in their own government. I find it sickening that they were quick to be emotional over drunken/drug addicted brothers, HIV ignorance, blow jobs and goofy speech rather than the sponsored murder of people in other countries.

If people are so swept up in emotion over the "facts" as told by Moore that they get up off their asses and become involved through education and/or voting in this nations politics then fabulous! What took them so damn long!

If people get so pissed off that they want to watch and hold our government accountable for its actions then its about damn time! People are quick to point fingers at the president, state leaders and anyone else convenient while forgetting that they are just as responsible by there own apathy for allowing government actions that piss them off to happen in the first place.

Eventually people will tire of Moore's grandstanding and arrogance. As they educate themselves, if they educate themselves, it can only be of service TO this country rather than by just being ignorant about it. When all is said and done the ends will justify the means and free speech will be protected, even if it is one-sided (which is what "one man's opinion" is all about).

Go ahead and be angry with Moore and F911, but instead of just spinning your wheels and arguing about it do something about it. Im glad there are people out their writing books, making movies and creating websites in answer to his rally cries of "Weve been screwed!". Why argue about it? The truth is there for all to see. If you are one of the ones that see it then fabulous! You can consider yourself an intuitive person who is not swayed by emotion but base your opinion on fact.

If you are one of the ones that believe that people like Moore should be silenced because you think his "opinion" is all lies you better be careful. I doubt that the "silence" would only be extended to just him alone and I doubt you would like being silenced yourself. This forum itself could also become victim to that very same silencing procedure.

***stewey*** · Jul 5th, 2004 3:41 AM

http://fahrenheit_fact.blogspot.com/

***substand*** · Jul 8th, 2004 3:33 AM

Originally Posted by conservative front

I was watching Gerlado the other night and he had a whole company with him in Iraq that supported the war or what about Oliver North? same deal.

Originally Posted by emerald dragon

I'd like to see Fox interview those same soldiers to see how they feel now.
OTOH, i believe Fox would only air them if they didn't stray from what they originally said. And if they did, I would wonder if they would air them, at all. We already know their biased.

Actually, I had thought that since Geraldo had given troop positions in Afghanistan on air, FOX and the US Govt did not allow him to do the Iraq thing.

I may be wrong though. About those soldiers who WANT war, of course you won't find them. I dont even think you'll find many people who thought/think this current Iraq war was needed/worth it would "WANT/LIKE" war.

No one likes it (well, not many people anyway). Some people think its needed at some point, others think its never needed.

Those who think it is needed every once in a while differ about how they decide when it is needed.

Some think its neccesary after 12 years of "diplomatic" sanctions in Iraq (in the current case), while others think we should, or should have, waited longer than 12 years for compliance.

Originally Posted by humanhybrid

My step son will be leaving in 2 or three weeks to Iraq. IT WILL BE A BAD and sad day!

Well, God bless him. May he return with Godspeed. Even if you agree or disagree with the war (not you in particular HH, but "you" meaning "everyone" in this case), I hope you will not just "support the troops, just not thier mission" but also really support him as well.

[edit above, I had said "them" when I meant "him", and changed it accordingly]

***substand*** · Jul 8th, 2004 3:51 AM

Originally Posted by defiantnoquisi

It is very possible to use "tricky editing" AND opinion.

No doubt, it is possible. Michael Moore did it, and so has everyone else. (The difference is) I was simply stating that if you BELEIVE something, there is no reason to use "tricky editing" to tell what you beleive. tricky editing (to me) includes (among other things) completely ignoring facts that pose problems to what you beleive.

I would venture to say that most of us "edit" what we say/post to prove our points. But we don't completely dismiss everyone elses opinion just because it doesn't fit our point. Furthermore, in a documentary especially, you should address those points, even though your documentary shows a different POV. For the most part, on this board, if there is something that discredits my view, I will either address that point or amend my position (as do most of us from what I've seen). However, Mr. Moore did not even address why "the other side" was wrong, even though he had as long as he wanted to do so. and by billing his film as a documentary, he was more obligated to defend the film's position than any of us are obligated to defend our posts. Therefore, if most of us defend our posts and Moore, with an obligation by his own admission of the "content" of the film (meaning it was a "documentary") does not (and refused to do so based on a basically unlimited time schedule), Moore is wrong, especially when he uses "tricky editing" to get around any objections to his point.

***dutchie*** · Jul 8th, 2004 3:58 AM

I haven't seen F911 YET but I probably will. If I would know in advance that it would annoy or upset me, I would NOT go (as I did with Mel Gibson's The Passion). Going to see a Michael Moore documentary means that you're willing to take the risk of seeing something that's bound to be opinionated. If you share that opinion, you WILL have a great time. Go, and enjoy. Do not go and whine afterwards, if you do NOT share that opinion.

BTW... to a foreigner like me, all this commotion around this thing works like a magnet... The fact that so many people get really upset about this documentary, IMO means that there must be something in it.