Quote:
Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 6 2004, 09:33 PM
You say this:
He shoots his films in the documentary style, but they are not honest documentaries.
And then add this:
On a side note in regards to F911, no one has challenged the content of the film, because it is factual.
That's a little contradictory isn't it? We can agree he's an entertainer.
Moore has openly challenged anyone to find non-truths in his research and no one has stepped to the plate.
It is mind-boggling to suggest no one has challenged the content of Farenheit 9/11, the attached being the most obvious but by no means alone:
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-D...renheit-911.htm
Another rebuttal from guest columnists at Newsweek.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/
Cowperson
|
I should mention that I have not seen the movie. And if I do, I will not pay for it.
I completely and utterly agree with what Cowperson said.
Read the 56 Deciets of Farenheit-911. (Link provided by Cowperson).
The author states what is said in the movie by Moore, then gives the actual account. He then gives a response by Moore and his team of lawyers.
I find it rather humerous that Moore requires a team of lawyers, to support his ulta leftist claims. If there was any truth to what Moore claims in his movies, he would not require a team of lawyers to back it up. The facts would speak for him.
If you read at the bottom of the entire article, it says in there that Hezbollah is funding the move to be shown in Lebanon and Syria. This is through Moore's Middle Eastern distributor, Front Row. Castro is showing the film to his countrymen. He is also asked about these reports, and is ask to respond.
Second, Moore was personally questioned about the terrorist connection at a Washington, D.C., press conference. He at first denied the terrorist connection, but was then confronted with the direct quote from his distributor. He stonewalled and refused to answer. So the man who spends so much time getting in other people’s faces with tough questions is unwilling to explain why he is accepting aid from Hezbollah.
Here is another example:
A lady who's child went to and died in Iraq, confronted Mrs. Bush in New Jersey. She was spouting off, pretty much word for word what Moore states in the move.
She was asking why out of all the families in congress, only 2 have family members serving in Iraq. And asking, if Congress supports the war, then why don't more children enlist.
Early in this segment, Moore states that "out of the 535 members of Congress, only one had an enlisted son in Iraq." The action of the segment consists of Moore accosting Congressmen to try to convince them to have their children enlist in the military. At the end, Moore declares, "Not a single member of Congress wanted to sacrifice their child for the war in Iraq."
If you just look at actual numbers, yes, there are hardly any congressional children in the war in Iraq. If you look at the ratio, congressional families are 23% more likely to have a family member serving in Iraq as compared the nation average.
Just comparing straight numbers is grossly inaccurate. You are comparing 535 families to over 250 million (minus the 535 that are already counted) families.
The same author also discounts Moore's other movie, Bowling for Columbine.
There is a link to it at the bottom of the that page.