Extremist Battle Royale

[scott_harpell]

Here is a link in case you really want to look at the lies in Moore's film 9/11.

[j_b]

there you go, why do you move on to baseless demonizing? you labeling of anyone who opposes your far rightwing politics as a socialist is in itself the telltale sign of your extremism (or is it stupidity?)

[scott_harpell]

Read the link J_B. I didn't call anyone a socialist ya tool. He is a self-proclaimed socialist. At least try to keep up.

[rbw1966]

How someone can throw out inflamatory insults and whine when he feels he's been threatened is beyond me.

 

By the way, I didn't think Greg's message was a threat at all.

 

I think Moore's an extremist, in that he uses inflammatory language and exploits sketchy evidence to try to sway public opinion. The ends don't justify the means. J-B, go smoke a bowl and calm down, bro. Your rants in defense of Moore are kind of weird.

[j_b]

you are free to pretend that jokes don't mold public perception and i am free to know better.

 

killjoy

 

Definition: [n] (informal) someone who spoils the pleasure of others

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/killjoy

 

party pooper

Definition: [n] (informal) someone who spoils the pleasure of others

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/party+pooper

 

Synonyms: killjoy, party pooper, spoilsport , wet blanket

 

 

That giant sucking sound you hear is all of the fun being taken out of spray.

 

demagogue: an orator who appeals to the passions and prejudices of his audience

 

do you also argue that people who take offense at racist/sexist jokes are killjoys?

 

there is something called poor humor and your attempt fits right in there. you, in fact, appear to believe that mmoore is an extremist. your premise is thus that everyone believes that it is so for it to be funny. more than an attempt at a joke i viewed your thread as a troll.

[scott_harpell]

Read the link J_B... then spout off.

[jjd]

I am seeing a potential offshoot from this thread: "The World's Most Boring People" or "The World's Most 'un-fun' People"

[j_b]

How someone can throw out inflamatory insults and whine when he feels he's been threatened is beyond me.

 

errr ... where, when?

 

By the way, I didn't think Greg's message was a threat at all.

 

right, telling someone they can't wait to meet so they can squash them under their boot is not a veiled threat . i am not sure what world you live in rbw666 but to me it is eerily reminiscent of another period of world history.

 

I think Moore's an extremist, in that he uses inflammatory language

 

he is straight shooter and knows that only shock value will get a liberal in the news.

 

and exploits sketchy evidence to try to sway public opinion. The ends don't justify the means. J-B, go smoke a bowl and calm down, bro. Your rants in defense of Moore are kind of weird.

 

moore is one of the few public national voices that progressives have and i am not about to let some rightwingers with an agenda drag him in the mud so that he can dismissed summarily.

[j_b]

I am seeing a potential offshoot from this thread: "The World's Most Boring People" or "The World's Most 'un-fun' People"

 

that has been tried before to little effect. demagogue.

[scott_harpell]

they can squash them under their boot

 

Careful there Michael... he didn't say that now did he?

 

Now... read the fucking link.

[Greg_W]

moore is one of the few public national voices that progressives have

 

Now you've got Dan Rather, too. What about James Carville, Terry McCauliffe, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter (a grown man named 'Jimmy'?), and Al Gore? They all spew your brand of sewage.

[j_b]

that guy's drivel is deliberately obtuse. i have read it before and it is by the same dude who has an obsession with moore and who has always failed to show that moore is wrong and/or that the inaccuracies in some of moore's work amount to anything more than minor errors. if anybody's work was put under as much scrutiny, it would not pass any 100% standard of accuracy either.

Edited October 1, 2004 by j_b

[rbw1966]

You called Greg extremist and stupid. That might ruffle some feathers, sport.

 

Furthermore, he said crushed under the boot of reality. Not his boot.

 

Moore's not a straight shooter.

[scott_harpell]

minor errors.

 

excuse me? In a documentary? Here is an example of type of 'lie' that Moore uses. Moore claims that the Saudis own 7% of America... it is in his film. The real truth is that the Saudis own 7% of the total in foreign investment. He also uses the fictitious figure of $860 billion as their stake in American soil. These are small errors? I think not... This is not an isolated instance in 9/11 or in any of his films. The man even lies about where he is from. Will you still continue to give your unconditional endorsement?

[j_b]

You called Greg extremist and stupid. That might ruffle some feathers, sport.

 

yes, i did so after he had written several pages of personal attacks directed at me. i consider myself quite restrained in that department. perhaps you should read the content of his posts in this thread.

 

Furthermore, he said crushed under the boot of reality. Not his boot.

 

crushed under the boot of reality upon meeting me. if it was only a rhetorical issue why would he need to meet me? what is it that he needs to convey that cannot be conveyed on the screen? think about it.

 

Moore's not a straight shooter.

 

certainly more than most people we see on the news everyday.

[cracked]

Unless Greg named his boot "reality", then the alleged "threat" is, obviously, not to be taken literally. Even a six year old would understand this.

[scott_harpell]

Here is a link in case you really want to look at the lies in Moore's film 9/11.

 

I might add that this the writer of this article voted for Nader in 2000 and his website is covered with articles attacking Bush's lies. I wouldn't fall for the whole right-wing conspiracy thing on this one J_B. Just read the fucking thing.

[j_b]

Moore claims that the Saudis own 7% of America... it is in his film. The real truth is that the Saudis own 7% of the total in foreign investment. He also uses the fictitious figure of $860 billion as their stake in American soil.

 

here is what is said in f911:

"Saudi’s have $860 billion dollars invested in America."

 

here is the supporting evidence:

 

“Over the next twenty-five years, roughly eighty-five thousand ‘high-net-worth’ Saudis invested a staggering $860 billion in American companies – an average of more than $10 million a person and a sum that is roughly equivalent to the gross domestic product of Spain.” Craig Unger, House of Bush, House of Saud, (Scribner: New York, 2004).

 

and

 

“Allan Gerson, an attorney who represents about 3,600 family members of victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks … said he is not suing the Saudi government, but he is pursuing ‘Saudi interests’ in the United States he estimated totaled about $860 billion.” “ $113 Million in Terrorism Funds Frozen,” CNN, November 20, 2002.

 

what is also said in f911:" In terms of investments on Wall Street, $860 billion is “roughly six or seven percent of America.”

 

supporting evidence: “With a total market capitalization exceeding $12 trillion, the NYSE Composite represents approximately 82 percent of the total U.S. market cap.” New York Stock Exchange News Release, “NYSE to Reintroduce Composite Index,” January 2, 2003. ($860 billion is about 7 percent of $12 trillion.)

 

http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/index.php?id=20

 

as i said, criticism of mmoore's work usually doesn't stand up to scrutiny. now if you have any other assertions of lies why don't you check them yourself before you write them onthis board? all of the facts presented in f911 are presented and supported at the above link and other links you'll find on the same page.

[scott_harpell]

Interesting that you got that off of Michael Moore's site. I did some mroe digging than you though and found Tanya C. Hsu a senior analyst of Middle East political economy at the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy. She states that this number is actually

sixty percent of the Saudi investments were in the United States, so the Saudis had about 420 billion invested in the U.S.

Care to write me off any more? Try something other than Michaelmoore.com eh? Oh and somethign else to chew on... If the Saudis owned 7% and they are roughly 7% of the foreign investment... what percentage of the country is owned by foreign investors?

[Alpinfox]

[scott_harpell]

Oh... and J_B... just wondered if you knew where Moore got his $860billion figure?

 

Moore asks Craig Unger: ?How much money do the Saudis have invested in America, roughly??

 

Unger replies ?Uh, I've heard figures as high as $860 billion dollars.?

[scott_harpell]

Or one might wonder how... with a country that has foreign investment around $700billion... how $860billion could be in the U.S.

[j_b]

scott: what you are doing is commonly known as "throwing the baby out with the bath water". we probably could argue pointlessly ad-infinitum about what is the exact figure of saudi investments in the u.s. but it would not change one essential fact which is that it is enormous. i.e. even a few % of total capitalized assets represent a huge mean to lever u.s. policy, which is exactly mmoore's point.

 

btw the info presented on mmoore's site is properly referenced so you can check it.

[scott_harpell]

There are 59 other documented ones... this is just one. If it was one isolated thing in one movie i would conceed, but it quite simply is not.

[j_b]

so go check these 58 others against what is said in the movie and how it is supported by evidence before you do anymore obfuscating. your finding a source which says that saudi investments are 450billions and not 680 does not amount to evidence that mmoore lies. especially since there are sources quoting 680 and that even if it is 450, it does not change the implications of having huge investments by a single foreign nation (few families actually) that could bring our economy down to a standstill (at best) whenever they see fit.