NFT: Fahrenheit 9/11

[millersnose]

Why haven't they invaded North Korea to get the 'WOMD' they are developing?

isnt this the point

NK now has nukes pointed at japan and south korea and are using them to extort money from the international community

they are untouchable in these circumstances

 

[millersnose]

ahhh...but Termi...Iraq didn't do anything wrong in regards to 9/11 - they have no proof that Hussein has any connection to Bin Laden. It was convenient to go into Iraq while they were over in Afghanistan (or to be more precise - when they failed to get Bin Laden). It is also convenient that dubya's dad failed to get Hussein as well.

if bush was retaliating to 9/11, he would have stayed focused on getting Bin Laden. he couldn't get him, so they got the next best thing.

the international community unaminously held the view huessein did have an active weapons programme

indeed even after 1441 was issued blix reported finding a new facility with chemical warheads

to suggest hussein didnt have a weapons program is re writing history

what hasnt been found is a specific stockpile of chemicals

 

[millersnose]

why not rid other countries of their dictators?

oh the old "we cant solve every problem at once therefor we must solve none" argument

WOMD? even the FBI has said that they doubted they existed.

do you know the difference between the FBI and the CIA?

 

[millersnose]

there was money to be made in invading Iraq as well. not only gaining control of one of the world's largest oil supplies, lots of US countries make alot of money in re-building Iraq.
..

except for the fact the 'US is paying for it

indeed one of the big concerns in the US is the billions this is costing

 

[millersnose]

Another thing for you Termy.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html

I would post it, but it is much to large.

It is about How the CIA put Saddam's Party in Power.

Saddam took over in the 70's

lol

a left wing nutcase posts on an obscure conspiracy theory site

brilliant

 

[millersnose]

Bush was planning to attack Iraq before 9/11 happened.

Whats your proof?
And try to come up with something Moore hasnt fed to you first.

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735

Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President


By Neil Mackay


A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC)..

laughable

what does "drawn up for" mean?

why list the politicians if they were not the authors?

a deliberate attempt to imply the politicians were the authors instead of a right wing nut job

and in any case regime change has been a publically decared policy on iraq even during the clinton administration

 

[Nuffy]

I think you shouldn't confuse papers that are prepared for someone rather than by that someone.

Classic case is the paper prepared for the Pentagon to outline worst case climate change (remember, the one about the UK becoming frozen due to changes in gulfstream flow).

I was in the UK at the time and every UK paper ran with it as a fact, until somebody realised that the Pentagon had papers prepared canvassing a variety of scenarios, it just happened to be the worst one which got all the coverage.

I also wouldn't read too much into "secret" briefing papers, unless you are aware of the premise under which it is prepared and the conditions defined, you can't judge the outcome without knowing the start point.

This is exactly the problem I have with Moore, he manipulates things to suit his arguement and many times takes things out of context, rearranges the timeline for maximum impact or creates innuendo without substance.

He is entitled to his opinion, but F9/11 is a political propaganda campaign, he freely admits that, so I just hope that people, when they are watching it, understand that, and take that into consideration when they are making their minds up. It is not a documentry, it is not fair and balanced (moores words, not mine), so people shouldn't accept it at face value.

Also forget WMD's, there was almost unanimous agreement that Iraq had WMD's, the only disagreement was the course of action to be taken.

Finally, you don't think that Iraq is a better place now? Also what about the other nations that have fallen into line after seeing what happened to Saddam.

Libya is out of the terrorism business, Iran is becoming more open, and even N Korea is backing away from the brinkmanship they had previously displayed.

You have to take everything into consideration before passing judgement.

 

[Alex28]

er...Millersnose...you haven't acknowledged the CNN post yet...

prepared to give this one to me yet?

 

[millersnose]

er...Millersnose...you haven't acknowledged the CNN post yet...

prepared to give this one to me yet?

i have acknoweledged it

you must have missed it


Alex28 wrote:
ok...your faults in the media challenge...

your challenge is rediculous - 60 errors in a 2 hour movie, and you want 6 errors in a 2 minute maximum news clip? you dont want much...



my reply

plenty of news peices run for aver an hour

bbc cnn fox and thousands of others put on peices that go for some weeks tallying up hours of air time


it seems to me you are unable to back your claim

if that is the case you should concede the point

 

[Alex28]

i gave you 5 cases where (predominately) CNN have mislead the public - i dont think i have anything further to prove.

i think you are probably not acknowledging this because you know you are wrong and the media is just as misleading as you claim Moore is - the problem here is that just about every media outlet in the world uses CNN as a news resource...

 

[millersnose]

you have posted individual stories with 1 problem

not the six i asked for in order for me to concede

by your reply moore is 60 times more likely to mislead than a mainstream news source

i agree with that conclusion

 

[macavity]

Alex, you are my hero

millersnose, you are an obvious racist.

Termi, you are a nutcase. But you are ok besides the politics.

 

[Alex28]

i think the fact that they completely "invented" one story is big enough.

name me one current affairs show that would go with one individual story for over an hour - bar a major international incident which would be made up of many numbers on small stories in any case? even 60 minutes only focus on one story for a maximum of 20 minutes at a time...

there's no point in continuing this - you expect me to prove my case when you aren't interested in even acknowledging mine.

 

[princessjen]

Whys that Princess Jen?

I dont know, a lot of people seem to like him and thats fine with me, I'm definitely not anti-USA or anything I just dont like some of the decisions he's made in regards to Iraq and stuff

 

[Terminator]

Kaz you dont seem to understand that espionage is equal on both sides, what you think are lies could be a cover to protect people in danger, that are involved in serious undercover work, this is the main problem with the left.

 

[millersnose]

Alex, you are my hero

millersnose, you are an obvious racist.

and which race am i "racist" against?

 

[millersnose]

name me one current affairs show that would go with one individual story for over an hour - bar a major international incident which would be made up of many numbers on small stories in any case? even 60 minutes only focus on one story for a maximum of 20 minutes at a time...

sure fox news just did a 4 part series into spy rings by israelis

there's no point in continuing this - you expect me to prove my case when you aren't interested in even acknowledging mine.

yes michael moore arguments usually fail when facts get examined

 

[Alex28]

er...we are not discussing Moore's faults now, we are discussing CNN's faults. funnily enough you aren't prepared to acknowledge them...

 

[millersnose]

you are the one to make the claim alex

it seems you are unable to back it beyond the "michael moore is more likely to mislead than a mainstream news source by a factor of 60 to 1"

 

[Terminator]

Termi, you are a nutcase. But you are ok besides the politics.

:lol: giggles and strokes pet tarauntula.