Re: [OT] Fahrenheit 9-11 was Re: Mazes and Monsters

"Ubiquitous" <weberm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:QOCdnYix2YCHC5jYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> capt_malachias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>"Ubiquitous" <weberm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> capt_malachias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>>>"Ubiquitous" <weberm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>>>> That does not negate the fact that "Fahrenheit 9-11" was a fictional
>>>>> movie, not a documentary.
>>>>
>>>>Upon what evidence are you basing that claim?  Be specific.
>>>
>>> It's been highly documented, actually.
>>
>>That it is not a documentary?  No, not that I have seen.
>
> I'm sure you wouldn't.

Let me know when you can produce any of this supposedly voluminous 
documentation, bub.

>>> I leave to you as a trivial exercise to look it up,
>>
>>Nice dodge.  Let me know when you grow the balls to actually answer the
>>question.
>
> In other words, you are not up to the task. Try these for starters:
>
> http://www.slate.com/id/2102723/
> http://moorelies.com/
> http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001376
> http://www.duamm.blogspot.com/

Feel free to point out the parts where they show to film to not be a 
documentary.  They are doing a lot of whining about bias, to which I say 
"Duh!"  They have, unsurprisingly, some factual quibbles, some of which
have 
better sup****t than others.  They have differences in opinion.  So?

>>Note that nothing you say below, even if true, shows this to be a
>>fictional movie and not a documentary.
>
> In other words, you are not about to let the facts interfere with your
> opinion.

Ubi, you wouldn't know a fact from an opinion if it shoved you on the
ground 
and ****ed you in the ass.

> That pretty much says all we need to know about your objectivity.

First of all, I never claimed to be objective.  Secondly, feel free to
show 
where an opinion I have expressed is contradicted by facts.  You have not 
managed so far.

>>> Off the top of my head:
>>>
>>> AlGore's "victory party" was footage from before the polls had opened.
>>
>>Is it anywhere claimed otherwise?
>
> Yes. The placement of the footage implied it.

I suggest you learn the difference between "imply" and "claim," you 
credulous moron.

>>> Moore claimed that Fox News declared Bush the winner, causing the
others
>>> to mysteriously change their minds. Actually, Fox also declared AlGore
>>> the winner and CNN was the first network to declare Bush the winner.
>>
>>Proof?
>
> It's a matter of public record.

....yet you are unable to find proof.

>>> The quote about Al Gore winning a third recount was taken out of
context
>>> (he was talking about a specific methodology that was not requested).
>>
>>By "specific methodology" you are referring to "complete statewide 
>>recount,"
>>of course.  At the time, Gore had only suggested a partial recount.
>
> The movie stated via that out-of-context clip that Al Gore would have
> won every recount.

Indeed it did, which was very sloppy, and as stated, factually incorrect. 
According to the CNN/Post/Times study, he would have won any *full*
recount, 
as I recall.  It would be stupid to claim he would win *any* recount,
since 
the limited samples taken in such a close race could swing either way.  If

they were going to do a recount, it should have been a full recount.  In
any 
event, this still does not

>>> Moore mentioned the myth about black people being turned away from
>>> polls.
>>
>>Myth?  It was certainly asserted by a significant number of members of
>>Congress.

> Al Gore being one of them.

....yet he did not sign any.  Why do you think that is?

>>> Moore claimed that Bush never read his morning briefing which said OBL
>>> had planned the attacks that day. Bush read the re****t which vaguely
>>> stated that they suspected that OBL was fixing to hijack a plane.
>>
>>Proof?
>
> The actual brief,

The text of the brief is not proof that he read it, moron.
>>> Moore conveniently ignored what Iraq was like before we liberated it.
>>
>>You are conveniently ignoring what it is like now.
>
> You really need to get a handle on your irrational hatred of George Bush
> clouding your objective view of reality. Things are objectionally better
> there than they were.

Sorry, kooknut, but the situation over there does not resemble your
version 
of reality.

>>> Moore took an injured veteran's comments out of context.
>>
>>Nonsense.  Explain exactly how his comments were taken out of context.
>
> Are you really this obtuse, or employing another weak diversionary
tactic?
>
> It's a simple matter to take a clip of a solider at Walter Reid
expressing
> his frustration in rehab and editing it to appear like he's answering a
> question of Moore's choosing.

Which soldier's expression, and what question are you asserting was posed 
out of context?

>>> Moore described footage of soldiers removing a passed-out drunk from
the
>>> street as abuse arising from the war being illegal.
>>
>>?
>
> In other words, some footage of a drunk who had passed out on the street

> was
> described as them humiliating a detained Iraqi soldier.

Were you there?  If not, how exactly do you know it was merely a drunk in 
the street?

>>> Moore claimed that the liberal media sup****ted Bush and the war.
>>
>>The media most certainly did sup****t the war.  Rah! Rah! Rah!
>
> No, they didn't.

Even in the movie we are talking about, there was footage showing the 
cheerleading.  Are you saying Moore made that up too?

> In fact, they declared it another "Vietnam quagmire" before it even
began.

Smarter minds did, anyway.

-- 
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley