OT - 9/11 Video.

[millersnose]

A lot of what Moore gives is facts though. Just he doesn't balance them out.

designed to mislead

Personally I think he is no more biaised in his presentation of a story than the news media, just the opposite slant and not delivered as a news article.

his whole drive is to paint a political picture

56 deceits have been counted in this rubbish

Then the news media, who have an opposite view, get into their much wider audience that Moore is biaised and its' all rubbish and then we get intelligent guys like you, who should be taking an alternative view in, rubbishing it as extremist and biaised without even viewing it.

are you seriously suggesting the media is pro bush????

I was expecting it to be a hell of a lot more biaised than it was. And a lot of what was said has also been reported in other places as well.

including america invaded afghanistan to procure an oil pipeline that doesnt exist?

 

[Macca]

Well you lefty pricks have achieved something in this thread. I am now going to watch the propaganda. You have made me see that I was going off half cocked. I still reckon my opinion of Moore won't change. It'll more likely get worse.

 

[Generalzod]

Well you lefty pricks have achieved something in this thread. I am now going to watch the propaganda. You have made me see that I was going off half cocked. I still reckon my opinion of Moore won't change. It'll more likely get worse.

Nobody is trying to change your mind Mcsharkie, Tells us what you think of it after you watch it...

 

[Macca]

Michael Moore is trying to change my mind don't you think?

 

[Generalzod]

No you either believe him or you don't.....

 

[lolesi]

I believe some bits of the fat bloke, but he is just like Bush and co.
He tells us what we want to know, i dont trust any of them.

 

[PJ]

are you seriously suggesting the media is pro bush????

I think sections of them are, yes.

56 deceits have been counted in this rubbish

How many did ours and the US gov use to get us to war?

 

[Generalzod]

FOX news network there pretty credible :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Macca]

No you either believe him or you don't.....

That's crap and you know it. Moore is making a deliberate attempt to sway opinion. He readily admits it.

 

[PJ]

He readily admits it.

And thats the difference between him and the "journalists"

 

[Macca]

I totally agree PJ. Journalism is ridiculously subjective. 60 minutes being the classic example. WORST show on telly.

 

[coolumsharkie]

I like Mike Moore he's funny! love his show too 'frontline'...

 

[Sheros los Deros]

You're entitled to your world view. But why is Michael Moore's film F 9/11 biased, Phantam? If you haven't seen the movie how can you judge? Perhaps it presents opinions you don't agree with.

I've seen it.

It is biaised.

It also raises some very interesting points that are worthy of discussion.

For a better look at how greedy and evil the current US administration is, excluding Bush who's just an idiot, have a look at "The World According to Bush"

I haven't seen it yet PJ, but it sounds similar to Bowling for Columbine.
Bowling for Columbine raised some interesting points as well. Overall I thought Bowling for Columbine was a patchy documentary. Good and bad.
Too much tell and not enough show at times, if you know what I mean.

I think I've seen 'the world according to bush' on ABC. I thought it was good.

 

[PJ]

think I've seen 'the world according to bush' on ABC. I thought it was good.

It was on SBS.

If you've seen that don't bother with Farenheit

 

[Sheros los Deros]

I remember the documentary suggesting that US Government policy was being influenced by advisors with links to the extreme right wing of politics. It was hinted Bush might be ignorant rather than knowingly deceptive about WMD and Iraq. He just followed advice from his right wing advisors who are the ones trying to influence government policy based their own agendas.

 

[PJ]

That's the one.

Also interviewed many of the advisors.

The other ones were the guys from Carlyle group and Haliburton who are making money hand over fist from this exercise.

 

[Generalzod]

I remember the documentary suggesting that US Government policy was being influenced by advisors with links to the extreme right wing of politics. It was hinted Bush might be ignorant rather than knowingly deceptive about WMD and Iraq. He just followed advice from his right wing advisors who are the ones trying to influence government policy based their own agendas.

The EVANGELICAL bible bashers...

 

[millersnose]

56 deceits have been counted in this rubbish

How many did ours and the US gov use to get us to war?

you tell me?

 

[PJ]

Well the 2 big ones were the links between Sadam and Osama and the WMD.

Are suggesting they didn't lie? You happy that you were told the truth? That their stated reasons were valid?

The absolute classic was the supposed Uranium supplied from North Africa. Bush sent a family friend and former ambassodor from the area to check it out. When the guy, whose name I can't remember but a bit from the story later may jog your memory, came back and reported to him there was nothing to support the report and in all likelihood it was wrong the Bush administration ignored that. Worse still in the State of the Union address (the most important public address of the year for a President) Bush told the nation that the link was proven by the same visit. Then when the guy wrote an open letter saying that it was not true the someone, and someone who had to be high up in the administration, outed the guys wife who was a senior spy in the CIA. Now this is not only treasonous but also an act that put a lot of CIA personnel and informants in danger and effectively ruined her career.

Despite having no evidence that the story was true. Despite having sources they went after themselves telling them it wasn't true, despite having the reports from their allies, namely the British who also investigated it, telling them it wasn't true, they went ahead and lied to the nation to justify their intended course of action.Then when the person whose evidence they are using as a basis stands up against them and says no they go out to hurt and discredit said person.

Sure Moore spins a line and is a bit easy with some of the facts. But his lies haven't led directly to the death of thousands.

 

[Booyah]

The real bravo two zero is a fine book and a nice piece of investigative journalism Booyah. There was always going to be huge question marks over the account, as McNabs original book was in great contrast to that of Chris Ryans account in " the one that got away"

Two blokes were on that same mission, both have hugely different accounts of what went on, but all books, the two the guys wrote, and the "real bravo two zero" are excellent reads and one can make up ones own mind about what went on.

Let's face it, the conflict hasnt hurt either mans careers !

I read Ryan's also, but I found his a little harder to take seriously. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that 'he' was on the cover in War paint and army fatigues with a Rifle.

Two blokes were on that same mission, both have hugely different accounts of what went on

I'd expect that. They both went different ways. - But I know what you meant.

They weren't bad reads either of them, even if they were more fiction then fact.