# New documentary on 9/11



## Guest (Jun 9, 2006)

--


----------



## Revelation_old (Aug 9, 2004)

Thanks for the link Wendy.

BTW. Good to see you back. Hope you're doing well!

Cheers.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2006)

--


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/911page.htm

This guy did a lot of investigative research on the whole 9/11 government conspiracy thing. I don't buy the whole argument and have, specifically, seen Discovery programs that refuted the claims about the demolition of the buildings. But it would be interesting to see a coherent argument given as i'd love nothing more than to see Bush and company indicted for mass murder.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Wendy said:


> Found this through an article in a Dutch magazine yesterday and decided to make it a separate topic and not post it under 'Flight 93'.
> http://www.loosechange911.com
> About the American government being complicit to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It raises some very interesting questions.
> Documentary takes about 85 minutes. You can download it or directly see it on the website (click 'Loose Change Second Edition').
> ...


Ooooooooo, Wendy, you know you are one of my favorite people here. But, :evil: , CONSPIRACY THEORIES get my proverbial goat. :shock: 8)

I can't get to the video, (primitive modem connection due to lack o' funds), but "loose change" has been circulating around the internet for some time.

The logic of the government conspiring to do this, is, just ... well the government isn't organized enough to pull this off, LOL. As I said, my husband has worked for the Federal Government for about 35 years. It's a miracle they have enough staplers in the office!

There is so much information, so many people who saw, witnessed, survived 9/11 that literally thousands of people would have to be in a a mass secret.

I suggest 2 videos.....

PBS again: NOVA "Why the Towers Fell" -- a very in depth examination by engineers, the architects, of the WTC etc. It is so obvious how the buildings collapsed the way they did.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

It has all the discussions, a transcript of the program, etc. YOU MUST READ IT, in depth, not some brief story in a magazine. Yes, we are subject to propaganda, but so is every other country in the world. If this were true, this would have been a headline in every paper around the world. Real researchers from other countries would have come to investigate.

Also, *I highly encourage people to rent "9/11" by Jules and Gideon Naudet,* two French documentarians who were making a film about a new fireman in training. They started filming in the early summer of 2001. They happened to be with the ladder company that services the WTC about 10 times a day -- heart attacks, minor fires, minor emergencies, etc., etc. They know that building inside and out.

The documentary is the only live footage from inside the Towers on that day. It also catches one of the planes hitting the WTC. One doesn't need to doubt something awful happened when jet fuel came flowing down an elevator, mind you from 80 stories up, setting people on fire. The entire lobby was destroyed in the first tower hit -- windows blown out. The firefighters in that tower didn't even know the second tower had been hit.

You watch/read these two documentaries alone (or the transcripts), every conspiracy theory goes out the window.

And why in God's name would Bush or anyone else kill 3,000 + people. With many in the government in on the plot? Impossible. As Benjamin Franklin said, "The only way 3 people can keep a secret is if two of them are dead."

Also, why did Osama Bin Laden and his other minions make references to this in their regular "video" reports to Al Jazeera?

I don't know why conspiracy theories exist. As though the truth isn't bad enough. The 9/11 disaster only proved we were terribly misinformed, unprepared, screwed up royally, were not prepared. We couldn't even get military aircraft up in the air on time to counter what we thought was a war.

This is again painful. How do we EVER know the truth then, if we disbelieve those who actually experienced it. If we see the grief on the face of the architect who felt guilty for not "making better" towers which were constructed in the 1970s I believed.

My friend who works at Merrill Lynch here in Michigan, knew I believe 3 friends killed in a NEIGHBORING Merrill Lynch office. They were killed by exploding GLASS. If you have been to ground zero ... I was there in... 2003 I believe ... you could see glass blown out of buildings surrounding the entire area -- apartments, businesses with windows boarded up. They weren't bombed.

I'm not a physicist by this is like a tornado that comes and explodes a house OUTWARD because of vacuums in air currents. The air becomes a vacuum outside the building, the pressure inside the building causes the windows to explode outwards.

I will stake my life that we were attacked by 4 hijacked planes, one that never got off the ground, one that was late "Flight 93" -- even the hijackers screwed up on that. And everyone knew they were going to die anyway. Oh PLEASE see the film.

I know people in NYC who ran from the collapsing towers. There was no "explosion", just rumbling. The metal literally melted.

Why conspiracies? Why, why, why?

If you see "United 93" you will see the mess that was made by both hijackers and individuals on the ground, who didn't know what the Hell was going on.

I read somewhere that no bodies were recovered because there were none in the Trade Centers above the 80th floor or whatever in both towers. ??????? I've read such unbelievable things. A commercial plane, a COMMERCIAL JET full of fuel -- all of them as they had just taken off and turned around -- slammed into the center of these structures.

You must be an engineer to understand all this. And to believe this was a government plot, as noted, THOUSANDS of people would have had to be in on this.

*I'm sorry, but these ideas are also painful, and make no sense. To have known witnesses personally, to see a recording of that entire morning, to have extensive analysis as so many news stations caught what happened on video!!!!!*

*And sad again, that it would make you happy sebastian to see that this was a huge cover up.*

If anyone has seen Michael Moore's film "Farenheit 9/11" -- a soldier is suing for his comments being misrepresented. Moore chose to edit as he pleased. There is also a detailed analysis of the film, don't know where I read this, of 47 errors in his documentary. BUt of course we MUST believe him. Even though he has been know to misrepresent himself time and time again. He uses editing as a weapon. It's easy to do. I know how to edit film and you can change a whole story/interview in the editing room. SO is this what happened on LIVE TV around the world on 9/11? No time for editing.

On the other hand I also read someone said this was all filmed ahead of time?????????? But what of the witnesses on the ground! The dead! The injured!

It seems we all wish to believe what we want to believe.
Conspiracies are the LAST things I believe in. Don't believe in the Da Vinci Code either. "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" -- the original "occult conspiracy".

I'm sorry. I'm not angry at you guys. I'm angry with people who have nothing better to do... and this includes many young Americans who love to indulge in this on the internet, same people who think it's funny to make and send virus' and spyware .... create conspiracies.

And attacks on politicians true or not happen in EVERY COUNTRY ON THIS PLANET.

I'm sorry. Both of you. End of rant.
But this I can't tolerate.
Peace, I wish, but no one can seem to get on the same page these days, anywhere in the world. We never really could, and I wonder if we ever really will.
D 

PS: I believe in Freedom of Speech which allows anything and everything to be said. Great. No censorship. But we have to use our heads, or logic. If we don't believe the real news, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, or only believe the BBC, or CBC, or Al Jazeera, then why believe in "news" that isn't remotely verified or scrutinized.

And I'm not saying we ALL don't get fed propaganda.

Sigh.
End of rant.


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> PBS again: NOVA "Why the Towers Fell" -- a very in depth examination by engineers, the architects, of the WTC etc. It is so obvious how the buildings collapsed the way they did.
> 
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
> 
> Also, *I highly encourage people to rent "9/11" by Jules and Gideon Naudet,* two French documentarians who were making a film about a new fireman in training.


Just, for the record, i've seen both of these and also highly recommend both of them, particularly the latter.

Ahh, PBS. I have to say though, i've been quite disappointed with NOVA as of late. They're either showing reruns (like the Newton bio they're showing this week i think, but which is well worth watching) or they're showing something on some ancient burial site that nobody cares about. I say bring back the hard science shows on NOVA. That's the reason i watch it. I wish they'd get back to basics on that show.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

sebastian said:


> http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/911page.htm
> 
> This guy did a lot of investigative research on the whole 9/11 government conspiracy thing. I don't buy the whole argument and have, specifically, seen Discovery programs that refuted the claims about the demolition of the buildings. *But it would be interesting to see a coherent argument given as i'd love nothing more than to see Bush and company indicted for mass murder.*


"Mass murder"? So then it is more logical that our own government did this than terrorists? Was it a government conspiracy that buses were blown up in London? That ricin was released into the subway in Japan? Is the Israeli/Palestinian war made up? Are Iran's threats an exuse to invade Iran?

Whom do we believe? And who believes? Which countries should believe what?

I'm glad you don't buy the whole argument Sebastian, especially if you saw the NOVA programs, there were many, and studied the 9/11 Commission report.

Why in the world, why, would we have done this to ourselves? And who is Bin Laden then? Is there really Al Qaeda? Or do they not exist? Or are they Americans hired by America to scare everyone.

This gets more and more absurd.....
Conspiracy theories are like the game of telephone we played as children.... after 10 children hear the same story it is totally different from the original account.

Sad, very sad.

And no, I am not defending the govermnet in this either! We did a horrible job of reacting to this. Though I'll say New York's mayor did a brilliant job. Many did. Took control of a disaster.

If you've never seen ground zero in person, especially closer to the catastrophe, you do not know what happened there. To see the damage to streets of buildings surrounding the WTC. There wasn't a bomb.

TWO COMMERCIAL JETLINERS FLOWN BY TERRORISTS, FULL OF FUEL, HIT THE WORLD TRADE CENTERS. PARTS OF THE PLANES WERE FOUND BLOCKS AWAY.

HAS ANYONE FLOWN IN A COMMERCIAL JETLINER? DID ANYONE SEE THE WTC BEFORE IT WAS DESTROYED? DID ANYONE SEE IT AFTER? IN PERSON?


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> If anyone has seen Michael Moore's film "Farenheit 9/11" -- a soldier is suing for his comments being misrepresented. Moore chose to edit as he pleased. There is also a detailed analysis of the film, don't know where I read this, of 47 errors in his documentary. BUt of course we MUST believe him. Even though he has been know to misrepresent himself time and time again. He uses editing as a weapon.


Michael Moore and any documentarian is compelled to use their editing as a weapon. That's the power of the documentary and it is used both ways. Look at Leni Reifentahl or whatever her name was, the Nazi propogandist. I like Michael Moore because while, yes, certainly he embellishes and uses various persuasive tactics to enlist support, he is actually a very powerful media watchdog and he keeps certain right wing groups in check. After all, we can't just allow Republican hyperbole to permeate the media.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

sebastian said:


> Michael Moore and any documentarian is compelled to use their editing as a weapon. That's the power of the documentary and it is used both ways.


No Sebastian I disagree completely. Think of the Naudet brother's documentary. It DOCUMENTS exactly what happened. GOOD documentaries may have a focus, a point of view, but they do not manipulate facts. These would be any propaganda film ever made.

I do not trust/like Michael Moore. Yes, he has an agenda, and he is allowed to have an agenda and point of view, but he should not LIE.

My favorite documentaries are invariably on PBS. My favorite documentarian is Ofra Bikel who has exposed "False Memory Syndrome", did the documentary on the McMartin preschool case. There are documentaries on the Holocaust ... "Shoah" is one. Are eyewitness memories that are unedited, where someone simply speaks for more than a "soundbite" -- aren't those a tad different?

There are documentaries I have doubts in. They make me think. But it is clear when there is solid reporting behind them. Documentaries are journalism, not games to manipulate people.

And believe me, along with this 9/11 conspiracy, here in the US we hear every anti-Republican story you can think of.

And again, the documentarian seeks truth, seeks to be a witness, a keeper of history. I don't trust that job to Michael Moore, or Oliver Stone for that matter -- example "JFK" ... another conspiracy theory, etc., etc.

Also, speaking of not being able to keep secrets. My father in law, now deceased, was an engineer who started out in the airforce. His job as he became more experienced was to build the prototype for the Space Shuttle. (He was building launch pads for the space program before that.)

He and those working on the shuttle (which was initially intended solely for military purposes) were not told what they were really doing. They did "parts" of the whole. Well, invariably, he and a close friend would sit down on the weekends, with my mother in law listening, and try to figure out what they were building, LOL. Both sworn to secrecy. They came very close. So much for keeping things under wraps.

I question every piece of journalism, book, TV show, documentary I see these days. I think I can tell when I'm being manipulated and when I'm not.

A great documentary, DOCUMENTS what IS. Someone may have a particular interest, may be trying to research a theory etc. But would you compare Moore's work to the "Global Dimming" documentary? I can't. And Global DImming is considered a Liberal Conspiracy.

Sorry for ranting.
I feel so sorry for the world. In a way I'm glad I don't have children. I fear for their future. On the other hand I have to hope that the best and brightest will make changes for the better. But I don't have as much faith in that as I used to.

This is like saying "The Holocaust never happened." "We never landed on the Moon."

I give up.
Peace, I hope,
D


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> And believe me, along with this 9/11 conspiracy, here in the US we hear every anti-Republican story you can think of.


The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.



> I do not trust/like Michael Moore. Yes, he has an agenda, and he is allowed to have an agenda and point of view, but he should not LIE.


Oh, I agree. I don't think he should blatantly lie either. And if he's seriously spouting off categorical untruths, i'll be the first to condemn him. Please let me know what some of these lies are so i can check it out for myself.

I'm all for truth, Dreamer. I truly believe that "The Truth shall set you free".


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

> I'm all for truth, Dreamer. I truly believe that "The Truth shall set you free".


God Bless you sebastian. That's all I'm looking for as well. And I'm glad we can disagree and yet have a civil conversation, taking into account I do get me knickers in a twist. An issue with me. :?

Here are two lawsuits pending against Moore
And note, his films are embraced the world over:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5036052.stm

*Director Moore sued by US soldier* 
Moore's film won the Palme D'Or in 2004

*A US war veteran is suing film-maker Michael Moore for $85m (?45m), alleging TV clips of him were used without his consent in documentary Fahrenheit 9/11.*

Sgt Peter Damon, 33, who lost both arms in Iraq, claims Moore never asked if he could use an interview Sgt Damon did with NBC's Nightly News.

*Sgt Damon claimed Moore edited the footage to make him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort".*

Award-winning director Moore was not immediately available for comment.

Sgt Damon is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation" according to the case filed in Suffolk Superior Court, Massachusetts.

Supporter

*The National Guardsman lost both his arms when a tyre on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and a colleague were servicing the aircraft on the ground in Iraq. Another soldier was killed in the explosion.

In Moore's documentary, Sgt Damon is shown lying on a stretcher with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels like he is "being crushed in a vise".

The clip is screened shortly after US Congressman Jim McDermott is seen speaking about the Bush administration: "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind".

The sergeant, from Middleborough, Massachusetts, claims that by putting the news clip of him immediately after the Congressman's comments, director Moore made Sgt Damon appear as if he felt "left behind" by the military and the Bush administration.

Sgt Damon maintains he was complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that he was suffering as a result of his wounds.****

The National Guardsman stated in case papers that he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind".........*

***** In Dreamer's POV, this is called sleazy editing. Moore is guilty of this all the time.*******

This next story is pitiful. James Nichols recognized his own brother's handwriting in a letter shown on TV and helped turn his mentally ill brother into authorities.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/29/nichols.ap/

*James Nichols sues Michael Moore over 'Bowling' (Bowling for Columbine)
Wednesday, October 29, 2003 Posted: 12:13 PM EST (1713 GMT)*

*DETROIT, Michigan (AP) -- James Nichols, the brother of Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols, says he was tricked into appearing in the documentary "Bowling for Columbine," according to a federal lawsuit filed against filmmaker Michael Moore.*

Nichols also alleges in the lawsuit, filed Monday in Detroit, that Moore libeled him by linking him to the terrorist act.

Nichols accuses Moore of libel, defamation of character, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

His lawyer is asking for a jury trial and damages ranging from $10 million to $20 million on each of nine counts, the Detroit Free Press reported.

A message seeking comment was left Tuesday with Moore's publicist.

In the film, Moore asks Nichols for an interview and steers the subject from the Oklahoma City bombing to gun ownership. Nichols tells Moore he has a gun under his pillow, and Moore asks Nichols to show him.

In the lawsuit, Nichols, who lives in Decker, said Moore misled him about the purpose of the interview.

"Bowling for Columbine" won the feature-length documentary Academy Award earlier this year.

--------------------------------------------------------

A decent journalist, a decent writer of non-fiction, a decent documentary maker does not do these things.

I know we are all sucesptible to being hoodwinked. I try to keep myself informed. And as I said, after 9/11 I tried my damndest, and continue to do so. I have found that in a day, I have to read one Conservative and one Liberal newspaper (of high reputation) -- The Wall Street Journal (C) and The New York Times (L) -- watch the BBC News and the CBC news as well.

That is humanly impossible and I can't follow much of the politics discussed.

I also try to read more complicated magazines such as "Foreign Affairs", not even Time or Newsweek anymore.

It's not possible. I'd be reading about politics alll day.

Indeed why I love a great documentary that I feel gives me something to think about.

Ah, PBS fan o' Mine 8) would you compare that AIDS documentary to a Moore documentary. That was very well balanced reporting as far as I could tell, already having read "And The Band Played On." by Randy Schilts who died of AIDS. Also, "Days of Grace" by Arthur Ashe, black tennis player who died of AIDS from a transfusion.

I can't read fiction anymore these days.

There is no time to keep up.

Yes, I'm looking for the TRUTH. I'm with you there.
Absolutely.
D 8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

> The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.


OMG SEBASTIAN you have to be kidding! :roll:

Another conspiracy! Started by whom, for what purpose? :shock: We're back to the beginning again.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2006)

--


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Wendy said:


> The 'conspiracy' theory leaves many many questions unanswered as well.
> Like Mulder (and Scully :lol: ) Im searching for the Truth and Im (not?)sure its 'Out There".


 8)

I think we're all on the same page. And the thing with Michael Moore is I have no more respect for him than I do for Jerry Falwell -- Jerry Falwell is actually an honest nitwit. And what Moore does is just more ... insidious .... I'm too tired to find what are called "deceits" that were found in his film, however, he doesn't "lie" per se, he "deceives", he manipulates events, comments, etc.

It's like what you hear so many times re: newspaper interviews. One is often misquoted, or something is taken out of context. That is very powerful on film.

I remember just a small example. Bush was reading to a class of children from a reader -- a child's textbook, a story about a goat. The book's name was not "My Pet Goat" (Moore made that up, literally -- it was a chapter in the reader called "The Little Goat" or something) When the President was told about the first WTC events unfolding in the class two major points were left out of Moore's film re: Bush's apparent "nonchalant" reaction to what had just been whispered in his ear:

1. The teacher in the class thanked God that he didn't suddenly get up and run out of the room as the kids would be frightened. She is quoted as saying this in many other sources. I believe 7 minutes passed during which time a rushed decision was made as to how to get the President out of the room without causing a fracas. It was being recorded -- I don't think it was live -- but it could have been -- it's on tape. Perhaps it was for a local broadcast to be shown later that evening.

2. There was an individual, some Presidential aide, or a bodyguard or I don't know, a TV cue card man. He was holding up a cue card behind the camera that was filming Bush reading to the children. The card read, "DON'T SAY ANYTHING." The reason was national security. No one knew what was really going on, where the President was safest, etc. No one knew if there was anyone in or near the school planning to assasinate him, and in the process potentially blow away a bunch of children.

Or worse, perhaps the school was a target as well. People knew where the President was. It wasn't a secret. What if the school was going to be attacked -- if not by a plane, but by a bomb? What do you say off the top of your head? You try to keep your head on straight. Best you can.

It was also intended to portray the President as calm. If he didn't look calm, composed, no one would be. *Imagine Clinton in the exact same situation, same information, exactly. Clinton is a wonderful communicator, but I doubt he would have done anything differently.*

Moore portrays Bush reading a book called "My Pet Goat" ... he humiliates him ... (I think Bush is capable of humiliating himself, LOL) ... which was NOT the name of the book, and implying *without giving out all of the information available* that Bush "didn't care", "wasn't surprised", "didn't jump to action." I also assume Andrew Card whispered in his ear to not react.

This only makes sense.

Moore simply chooses to play this in a completely negative light. No big deal, but he does it through the entire film. Leaving "little things" out here and there. Taking "sound bites" out of context.... I won't go on.

Using editing as a weapon. Why change the name of the story? Why even mention it? It was a little insult. Unnecessary information.

Let's keep searching for the Truth. I believe it's out there, but I don't think we can find it ... can't find the forest for the trees. And that makes me sad.

On the other hand the weather here in MEEEECHIGAN is gorgeous, Wendy.
Sorry. Nice and cool. 8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Double post.
Nite!


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Oh, I'm sorry, this came to me and I had to look it up. I can't keep anyone straight in my head, never have been able to.

It was not James Nichols, the brother of Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols who IDd his brother. Sorry. But it was a low blow for Moore to exploit him in "Columbine" ... also, I have comments about the parents of those kids being brainles, but that is another story.

It was the Unabomber -- Ted Kaczynski. But Moore may as well have interviewed his brother David who turned him in. SImilar story. Made just as much NON-sense

Perfect for exploitation that has nothing to do with the matter at hand. Just shock value.

About the Kaczynskis since I looked it up. I have to get up in 5 hours. I'm INSANE.
"Kaczynski's younger brother David recognized Ted's writing style from the published manifesto and notified authorities. After a team of forensic linguists compared text samples provided by Kaczynski's brother and mother with the Unabomber's writings and determined they had been written by the same person, officers were sent to arrest Kaczynski on April 3, 1996, at his remote cabin outside Lincoln, Montana.

David Kaczynski had once admired and emulated his elder brother but had later decided to leave the survivalist lifestyle behind. David had received assurances from the FBI that he would remain anonymous and that in particular his brother would not learn who had turned him in, but his identity was later leaked ? prompting an unsuccessful internal investigation by the FBI.

In addition, the family received guarantees, which were later betrayed, that prosecutors would not seek the death penalty against Ted. David donated the reward money ? less his legal expenses ? to families of his brother's victims."

... so that's what you get when you're the brother of a serial killer. When you are the "good brother". You get exploited and treated like Hell. By everyone. Michael Moore or the government, lol. Pick your poison.

Why can't I keep my serial killers straight?

Your fault, Wendy :shock: 
NITE , NITE, NITE


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.


Too f*****g right!

Why all this debate? It's so undignified. Two planes, flown by insane religious fanatics, crashed into the WTC, and they collapsed. What else is there to talk about? And why?


----------



## Guest (Jun 13, 2006)

--


----------



## Guest (Jun 13, 2006)

--


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Martinelv said:


> > The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.
> 
> 
> Too f*****g right!
> ...


What Wendy said to this!

AND, a certain dude by the name of Martin started all of this mess with the following:



> This monstrosity of a film, next years Oscar winner, just about sums up how I, currently, feel about America (note: not americans).
> 
> Where is the dignity in this film? Will the enormous profits go to the families of the people who died on that plane? Will the actors, when attending the premier, standing in front of a microphone, moisten their eyes and have lips trembling with repressed emotion? You know what? I doubt it.
> 
> ...


*Martin ... You provoke, then attack as though someone else has provoked. Sorry I love to research. It helps me keep my mind of the DP/DR. It really does. And it is a passion of mine, just as your writing is. Why do YOU care so much about this discussion to get YOUR knickers in a twist?*


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> sebastian said:
> 
> 
> > http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/911page.htm
> ...


No, it isn't more logical. That isn't what i said. I said that i'd love to see them indicted for mass murder. That doesn't imply that i think they're responsible for 9/11.


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> > The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.
> 
> 
> OMG SEBASTIAN you have to be kidding! :roll:
> ...





Dreamer said:


> > The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.
> 
> 
> OMG SEBASTIAN you have to be kidding! :roll:
> ...


Dreamer, i'd love to get into this now but it requires time and assiduous attention. Neither of which i have here at work today. Maybe over the weekend i'll elaborate on what i mean. Well...i guess i definitely have to do it this weekend in the "put up or shut up" vein.

As for Michael Moore...those cases sound more like persuasive journalism than blatant lies. I admit that that kind of "reporting" might be ethically dubious but i would throw the same labels at Ann Cloutier, Bill O'Riley, the entire FOX news network, and a plethora of other right wing "journalists". They're propogators of an agenda, the same as Michael Moore. These people take things out of context all the time and apply it to suit their own needs. I don't remember exactly what was said in those two MM films. It's been so long since i've seen them. But it may be just that these people don't like the way it was edited together...what i mean is, maybe the context of their quotes/actions were correct but they didn't like how forcefully MM portrayed their feelings as relative to the rest of his film and his wider objective. What i mean is (and this is purely theoretical since i know very little about this particular charge), this soldier could have truly been speaking out against the war, but given the wider context of the film, have been appalled to find that his remark is one of several which condemn the government and which, taken as a whole, could be construed as liberal wish-wash and possibly even un-American.

Sorry, i have to go now but i will post more later this week or over the weekend. Damn, work!

s.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

sebastian said:


> I admit that that kind of "reporting" might be ethically dubious but i would throw the same labels at Ann Cloutier, Bill O'Riley, the entire FOX news network, and a plethora of other right wing "journalists". They're propogators of an agenda, the same as Michael Moore. *These people take things out of context all the time and apply it to suit their own needs.*


Sebastian, we are on the same page. I agree with what you're saying here. And what is important is you say "journalists" -- in quotation marks. I wouldn't take the word of any of the people you named -- of course Coulter is horrible and O'Reily is a laughing stock. I agree with you! This is my very point. I also can't stand it when an op-ed writer in The Times refers to everyone she's attacking with nicknames. "Rummy", "Dubya", etc. Forgot her name at the mo. Unnecessary, we get the picture, etc., etc.

*One can be a "journalist"/propagandist -- note the quotation marks -- or one can be a true Journalist with a capital J. I actually have known a few in my life (dated one years ago, someone with integrity though he and I didn't agree on everything political -- and we still had a good relationship).

Personally. There is a huge difference. The Journalist will earn my respect. The Propagandist has no credibility with me -- never will. An insult to whatever positive neuronal activity I have left.*

This is my beef with Moore -- and you agree with me if I haven't lost my mind. So we aren't arguing. There is no need to lie and manipulate when one can honestly convey the truth. This would be like planting evidence in a trial when a man is clearly guilty of murder. Completely unnecessary and off-putting and then leads to reasonable doubt! Let the truth speak for itself, don't embellish it as if your audience were stone fool idiots.

It ruins the credibility of EVERYONE you've mentioned above and there are many more. And thank God there are excellent journalists and documentarians we can depend on to give an honest picture that isn't embellished with insulting manipulation of our logic and our emotions.

*As George Orwell said somewhere, "All propaganda is a lie, even when it tells the truth."*

Oddly enough, we aren't in disagreement, we really aren't.

*OK, at this point, as Martin says, (so it must be true), this discussoin is a complete waste of my time, and everyone else's here.*

Peace,
D


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

I chopped off the last bit of that article about the soldier by accident. The soldier suing Moore is being quite clear in his motives. There are many US soldiers who have been injured in Iraq or other wars and wish to go back! I have no judgement on that either way. I see it as the same sense of duty a fireman has when he returns again and again and again into a burning building to save "one more person." (Recall the firemen in the Naudet documentary).

I believe this man. Moore also violated a law which requires permission from individuals (under certain conditions -- excluding large crowds, etc.) to be filmed. Obviously, Moore failed to get this man's permission to use him in the film. All he needed was a signed waiver. Instead he took existing footage from an NBC broadcast w/out the permission of the individual being filmed, and edited it into the film. The man was NOT INTERVIEWED FOR the film by MOORE. A clip of him from a news broadcast was edited into Farenheit 911. Completely out of context.

"*The National Guardsman stated in case papers that he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind".*

The soldier is seeking $75m (?40m) in damages. His wife is seeking an additional $10m (?5.3m) because of the mental distress caused to her husband, according to Sgt Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch.

The pair are also suing Fahrenheit 9/11's distributor, Miramax."[/b]

Done, done, done, done, done.
Martin, don't know why you are so damned bitter.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> Martin ... You provoke, then attack as though someone else has provoked. Sorry I love to research. It helps me keep my mind of the DP/DR. It really does. And it is a passion of mine, just as your writing is. Why do YOU care so much about this discussion to get YOUR knickers in a twist?


For the love of god woman, what is your problem? (Martin says, with a smile on his face, because he does actually love Dreamer). Where am I am provoking? Ah, I forget, I'm not allowed an opinion. Especially if it clashes with yours.

Why DO I care? That does not dignify a response.

Bitter, spiteful, angry......yawn. Are you provoking me? Yes, I know. And I don't give a damn. I have a trillion and one reasons to be.


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Dreamer said:


> > The only reason there are so many visible anti-Republican conspiracy stories is because your entire country is saturated in a true anti-liberal conspiracy.
> 
> 
> OMG SEBASTIAN you have to be kidding! :roll:
> ...


Dreamer,

Far too many positive things are emerging in my life right now to sustain the bitterness required for me to formulate an argument on this point. So i'll just briefly tell you what i mean just so it doesn't seem like i'm randomly throwing out cool sounding quips just for the hell of it.

What i mean in a general sense is that the republican agenda is propogated by the "system" in general, in order to sustain it's own hegemony. (I mean "republican" in a perjorative sense here. Basically, i'm talking about the perverted version of republicans as represented by Bush, Cheney, and the rest of their ilk. Republicans, in principle anyway, i don't necessarily have anything authomatically against.)

A multitude of interests vicariously conspire to perpetuate the system which keeps them alive, to the detriment of change and a free and just society. Those interests include, but are not exclusive to, the energy industry (one only has to look at the Exxon agenda, the Enron debacle, or the U.S. governments insinuations into oil rich countries to know what i mean...specifically, one aspect of this would be the American promotion of their dollar as the official reserve currency of oil rich nations.)

Another interest would be the American media who are mostly owned by massive corporations and have their news content goverened by boards of directors who are more concerned with the stock value of their parent company than any kind of journalistic integrity value system. They have a vested interest that the world see things in black and white...that war and chaos are promoted and that the nation is kept in perpetual fear.

Of course religious fundamentalism also keeps the agenda alive, supplanting secular rationalism and stymieing scientific progress. Church and state are not separate in America. Certainly more so than in other countries but not to the exten that they should be.

I do apologize for how thrown together this is. I'm at work and i really don't have time to think and write all this. Just to throw up a few ad hoc examples, i would refer you to the Clinton impeachment process and how bloody ridiculous that whole witch hunt was. I would point out how FOX news, with it's insidious bend toward a hawkish agenda, is the highest rated in the country. I would point out the recent legislations infringing on civil rights (Patriot Act, TIPS, etc.) and how little news coverage they were given. I would compare the budgets for education and the budgets for military and suggest that due to the rampant nationalism that's instilled in American minds (not, in itself, a bad thing, to my way of thinking), and in combination with the two former points, it makes it very easy for the powers that be to manipulate the public just by throwing up a few scare words (like "terrorist" or "Axis of evil").

I'm sorry, i really can't write more now...have to go. I think we see eye to eye on a lot of things Dreamer (the joy of watching PBS being one of them), and i also think there are a lot of absurd conspiracy theories out there. But i do think there is an overarching anti-liberal tendency in the U.S. and i think it's there because the American public...the majority of them anyway, are persuaded to some extent, by certain elements that have a vested interest in the status quo.

I have to go.

s.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

> But i do think there is an overarching anti-liberal tendency in the U.S. and i think it's there because the American public...the majority of them anyway, are persuaded to some extent, by certain elements that have a vested interest in the status quo.


I know you were in a hurry Sebastian. I tried to answer your post initially with about seven pages of random ranting. This is far too complicated to discuss on this forum, and I don't want to argue any more.

But I don't really understand what you are saying. You said you were in a hurry.

I just deleted the bulk of what I wrote, mainly because it is indeed impossible to discuss world history and politics on a forum, and we are all entitled to our POVs, and my purpose isn't to defend the US. We are as imperfect as every other country in this world. There is no Utopia on this planet.

Bottom line, I don't believe in conspiracies, gross generalizations, demonizing of individuals of groups, but more than anything else, nothing is simple. That's all I need to say. Politics deals with so many issues that are inextricably linked -- population size, cultural context, economics, specific needs of various countries and of various peoples.

Oh and to clarify somewhere -- I meant, many conspiracies have been recently *attributed to* Conservatives, not conspiracies *perpetrated against them.* (I.E. that Bush planned 9/11. That and anything of that ilk I simply do not and cannot believe.)

No country, no political system, no philosophy of life, no religion is "the answer." We have to take the best, what works, in a world where there can no longer be isolationism of any country.

We have a billion problems in this country, same with every other country on earth, and there are a billion problem in this world. They weren't caused by one person, one government. And history repeats itself, but the world keeps evolving and what worked for one generation doesn't work for the next. I am hopeful for young people seeking solutions at this moment for the sake of their future.

*I don't believe for a minute there is some "Conservative conspiracy to overtake non-conservatives." In my longer ramble I said, that would imply non-conservatives have no power or intelligence for reasons I don't understand (not possible), or they are not taking action, or are not taking enough action. There are two sides to this story. We have Congress, we have other politicians besides Bush. We have local and state government that deals with issues in different ways. The Federal Government is not in charge of every decision and shouldn't be.*

And Bush -- he's a politician. Bottom line I don't think he's that smart. He isn't smart enough to be devious. He is very concrete in his thinking. A bad communicator. And the information any of us receive from the media. We should question it all. I had to phone my husband to explain a scary article about health care here. He found an article in another paper that had a whole different spin on the thing. Spin City.

Also, sadly enough, as I see with myself ... I'm scared of the future. I wasn't created "equal" -- I have a lot of problems, not just DP. Many people have a lot of problems that local/state or the federal government can't fix that easily. There is no such thing. How we deal with that is incredibly complex.

Best,
D


----------

