F911 Additional Features

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by dangler22@Oct 19 2004, 04:05 AM

surprised you didn't know I was being sarcastic.

Hey, one sarcastic comment deserves another! That's what I always say.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Poor arguement, as Dis said they are still hunting.

Poor argument? You said "if he would have kept his promises, 7,000 people would be alive today. "

Well, Bush promised to hunt down Bin Laden and has yet to do so. Granted, perhaps they haven't given up on him and are possibly still trying, but what if he organizes another attack in the near future that kills thousands more? Then Bush would have not kept his promise, either.

Is that how all democracts think?

I have no clue, I am not a democrat.

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 18 2004, 09:01 PM
My teacher is right IMO, because there is no two sides to the issue and in a largely conservative area that is probably what would be needed.

WTF are you talking about? What largely conservative area? What are you talking about? You are making no sense what so ever.

You're talking from a democrat point of view, so obviously the Republicans have done everything wrong, but i don't believe that 9/11 and fear is the sole heart of their campaign.

Okay, but you're talking from no point of view. You haven't quoted a point of view and haven't said anything at all to support yourself or your views. If you're going to wade into the fray come with an argument that is YOURS and come with some backup.

Kerry's record and flip flops have helped them a lot, as well as many other things Kerry's wife as well as Edwards wife have said.

Nice talking points. There is no truth to them, but nice talking points all the same. Where's Tranny when you need him? This is exactly what David Brock is talking about when he talks about innuendo becoming accepted fact. Kerry is a flip flopper (which he is not) and Bush is a great leader with a steely focus (which he is not). Bush has just as questionable a record when it comes to changing his mind, but that is not something that is talked about when it comes to the Republicans. Its well documented that Bush has had as many flip flops in the last four years as any politician. Unfortunately the talking points do not make it so to the general public.

And what do the wives of Kerry or Edwards have to do with anything? Nothing. Or does Laura Bush's vehicular manslaughter and drug sales as a younger woman come into play? They should not. Its irrellivant to the debate. Leave them out of it.

And Bush did nothing thats why Moore's all over him, i thought Bush invaded two countries one where there was good evidence that Bin Laden was located at. How did he then do nothing?

Okay, now you're just being annoying. How many people have to explain to you that Bush did nothing to prevent the 911 attacks. He had multiple briefings, including one on Aug 6, 2001, that explicitly stated an attack was coming from bin Laden, and yet he did nothing. This is why Moore and others are all over the President.

Iraq hasn't been a complete failure yet, Saddam is out of power, which was the intent of the attack.

Sorry, this was never the intent of the attack. This is part of excuse number four, which doesn't sell. So far Iraq has been a disaster and is deteriorating. The highly protected "green zone" is now subject to almost daily attacks. This is not a good sign and does not give anyone the confidence that things are going well or improving.

I live in Southern Alberta, our conservative candidate won 97% of the vote for MP.

You call supporting the War in Iraq, and then saying you don't to now going back to saying you would keep the troops there not flip flopping?

He supports the War, but doesn't want to support the troops?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...MNGQK8TI8O1.DTL

That is what you call not flip flopping?

[dangler22]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan+Oct 19 2004, 04:08 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Displaced Flames fan @ Oct 19 2004, 04:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-dangler22@Oct 19 2004, 04:05 AM

surprised you didn't know I was being sarcastic.

Hey, one sarcastic comment deserves another! That's what I always say. [/b][/quote]
touche- but my wiseass comment was way better than yours. sucker.

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by KootenayFlamesFan@Oct 18 2004, 09:10 PM
Poor arguement, as Dis said they are still hunting.

Poor argument? You said "if he would have kept his promises, 7,000 people would be alive today. "

Well, Bush promised to hunt down Bin Laden and has yet to do so. Granted, perhaps they haven't given up on him and are possibly still trying, but what if he organizes another attack in the near future that kills thousands more? Then Bush would have not kept his promise, either.

Is that how all democracts think?

I have no clue, I am not a democrat.

Bush is trying. Clinton gave up is what i am refering too.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by dangler22@Oct 19 2004, 04:10 AM

touche- but my wiseass comment was way better than yours. sucker.

Not a chance my friend. You didn't realize mine was wise-ass, I knew yours was the whole way!

[dangler22]

I had an inkling, but I played it safe.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by sjwalter@Oct 19 2004, 03:47 AM
Chastise him for diverting attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandel? Is that opposing the strikes on the camps?

IMO i remember the scandel and i remember the attacks, and he did do it to divert attention away.

Clinton had five previous attacks on America before he decided to strike back, why not strike back after the first one?

As the article says, if he would have kept his promises, 7,000 people would be alive today.

Please, give the talking points a rest. In one post you whine about Clinton not doing anything in response to terrorism, and in this one you whine about it being a diversion for the "Lweinsky" affair. According to Richard Clarke the Lewinsky affair never entered into decisions regarding the country. He did not allow his personal life to affect his decisions on the country and the bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan were part of those decisions that were no impacted.

Also you're full of crap on your "Clinton had five previous attacks on America before he decided to strike back". Do your research. Come back and post something to support this.

[arsenal]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 18 2004, 06:09 PM
"And i agree with arsonal, Moore is the one keeping the election close because of his bias movie."

How would Arsenal know, he hasn't seen it. He admits it himself. My suggestion is to watch the movie yourself and make your own call.

I have seen both movies. Moores and Kopels. Just a FYI.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I live in Southern Alberta, our conservative candidate won 97% of the vote for MP.

Hilarious. I got news for you junior, what is conservative in Canada is not conservative in the United States. There is no direct comparison for the parties and their beliefs. And last time I checked, living in Southern Alberta does not make you a Republican nor align with the Republican point of view. So far it seems like your teacher is one of those Reformers that eastern Canadians were afraid of. Oh, and I was a Reform member when I lived in Canada and volunteered to help out on the campaigns in Calgary. So I am well aware of the Reform/Conservative platform.

"He supports the War, but doesn't want to support the troops?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...MNGQK8TI8O1.DTL

That is what you call not flip flopping?"

Wow! That's a great link. I couldn't have dug a better one up myself. Did you bother to read it before you posted it? It supports the opposite side of your argument. In other words it supports those that say Kerry is not a flip flop.

You're in over your head junior. Call it a day and live to fight another day.

[sjwalter]

Lanny, read the bottom of the article. Those are Kerry's comments about the war in Iraq and they clearly show him moving back and forth between his stance on the invasion.

The rest of the article is irelevant to me.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by arsenal+Oct 19 2004, 04:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (arsenal @ Oct 19 2004, 04:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 18 2004, 06:09 PM
"And i agree with arsonal, Moore is the one keeping the election close because of his bias movie."

How would Arsenal know, he hasn't seen it. He admits it himself. My suggestion is to watch the movie yourself and make your own call.

I have seen both movies. Moores and Kopels. Just a FYI. [/b][/quote]
Oh you have have you. You stated in another thread that you had not seen it and would not see while paying for it.

Right Here in Black and White

So are yo saying that you saw it in the last week or so? Seems like you're BSing us on that. Also I think you are definitely BSing us on the "Kopel" film. Kopel did not write or produce the film (Dick Morris did) and only appeared in it. Care to say where you saw the movie?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by sjwalter@Oct 19 2004, 04:32 AM
Lanny, read the bottom of the article. Those are Kerry's comments about the war in Iraq and they clearly show him moving back and forth between his stance on the invasion.

The rest of the article is irelevant to me.

Time for some reading comprehension. The common thread in each speech is "diplomacy". How did you miss that?

[arsenal]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Oct 18 2004, 09:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Oct 18 2004, 09:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

I have seen both movies. Moores and Kopels. Just a FYI.

Oh you have have you. You stated in another thread that you had not seen it and would not see while paying for it.

Right Here in Black and White

So are yo saying that you saw it in the last week or so? Seems like you're BSing us on that. Also I think you are definitely BSing us on the "Kopel" film. Kopel did not write or produce the film (Dick Morris did) and only appeared in it. Care to say where you saw the movie? [/b][/quote]
I watched them both over the weekend. In my house. So, Dick Morris took Kopel's ideas and put them in a film. Fahrenhype 911 is basically just a bunch of people talking about what was said in Moore's film.

The Oregon State trooper that was interviewed in Moores film, didn't even know he was in the film untill someone told him "Hey, You're in F911", he was like "Huh? What are you talking about?".

But I like I said before, earlier in this thread. Moores film is based on truth. Just like Kopel's rebuttle. What I said was Moore presents the truth in the movie in a way that is misleading.

The soilder that was in the hospital bed, describing what it felt like to have lost both his arms, was describing it to Dan Rather. Moore hijacked that part and put it in his film. He didn't consult the soilder and ask him if it was ok to put that in the movie. Moore does things that are deceitfull. You can't deny that.

Which is why Kopel called it "59 Deciets of Fahrenheit 9/11", not "59 lies".
Deceit is defined as this:
The act or practice of deceiving; deception.
A stratagem; a trick.
The quality of being deceitful; falseness.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

And where did you get Fahrenhype 9/11? Where did you rent it? Think about this one before you reply. You might also want to consider where the idea for Hype came from and who gets the credit of being first. You're on very thin ice here and will sink yourself with the wrong step.

[arsenal]

Why, you can buy them right here:
9/11 Movies

I borrowed both movies from a friend.

[CaramonLS]

I'd rather slam my head into a wall repeatedly than start another argument with sjwalter... at least hes not quoting blogs this time lanny.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 19 2004, 05:15 AM
Why, you can buy them right here:
9/11 Movies

I borrowed both movies from a friend.

You will excuse my skepticism. While F911 is available almost everywhere, Hype is not. It is in very limited release in the United States and is extremely difficult to get, even from the mail order houses. So the odds of someone in Canada getting a copy of a film that is in short supply is unlikely. The odds of someone who has vowed not to see F911, just having watched it, also seems unlikely. Now when you add in the magic "I borrowed them BOTH from a friend", well my BS detectors go off in a big way.

If you've seen F911, which I do not think you have, you should be able to answer these extremely easy questions.

1) What visual from the 911 attacks is most impactful? The jet striking the first tower, the jet striking the second tower, or the towers coming down?

2) What building is Moore doing an interview outside of when he is approached by a secuirty guard, and who does that security guard work for?

3) What is the last scene in the movie and what is the last line?

Extremely easy questions. If you've seen F911 you'll be able to knock this out of the park. I don't think you have and I don't think you've seen Hype either. I think you're working off of Kopel's site and trying to snow us all.

[Flame On]

Is it possible to have a OT Troll? Both sjwalter and arsenal have about as good a grip on language as a troll I'm sure. And before I'm accused of discounting them cause they don't agree with me, I'll point out that barely a thing comes out of DIS's fingers that I agree with but he doesn't confuse his point more than he makes it.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by sjwalter@Oct 19 2004, 03:17 AM
Kerry's record and flip flops have helped them a lot, as well as many other things Kerry's wife as well as Edwards wife have said.

Just wanted to point out that Bush does indeed do a lot of flip flopping of his own. Just another instance.

Is this a flip, or is it a flop?