j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 J_B... he admitted the Bin Laden farce on national T.V!!! What more do you want? Sheesh!!! you'll have to be less cryptic to gain any point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Okay, a little point-counterpoint. I can hang with that. A. So, j_b is making the rules for cascadeclimbers.com? Do you have sanction from jon and timmy to make such rules with abandon? Or are you just living by your own rules? If that is the case, why can't I live by my rules? The root of this, I am sure, is your liberal ideology that says that you, as an "enlightened" elitist, know what is best for said "society". This is where we differ. I believe that each individual knows what is best for their situation and each person should have a voice. The caveat being that what someone thinks "is best" shouldn't violate the individual rights of another. So, by making this rule you have violated jon's rights to control how information is transferred on HIS website, of which we are simply participants. You have also violated my rights to privacy in publishing a correspondence which I believed was between you and I. Without my sanction, you had no right to do that. It seems that you are perfectly okay violating the rights of others to accomodate your own personal desires. Very telling. B. You are, by implication, calling me an abuser. Abuser of what? Are you attempting to defame my character? I will tell you that this constitutes a highly offensive personal attack. The mistake you make is to use a vast generalization without knowledge of the specific person you are dealing with. Not that it matters, but those who know me know how foolish your assertion is. What is disgusting is your use of ridicule to supress the message of others. Further, I would like to state that it seems that many people have lost the ability to communicate in simile and metaphor in our current time. I don't know why that is; maybe because people are so paranoid about being overheard as "politically incorrect" or offensive. People have lost the ability to laugh - at themselves, at society, at the perceived problems in society. My final note is to say that your attempt to label me as an 'abuser' is weak. C. You are wrong. What I am is vastly important - to me. You attempt to label me as an 'abuser', yet you do not acknowledge my counter-argument of what I really am. You, who does not know me, are able to pigeonhole me, but I cannot respond? Pretty one-sided, allowing only your message to be heard. Are you afraid of allowing both sides to be heard? Again you are attempting to build your base of "everyone" that will bolster your argument. If your argument had any basis it would stand on its own. Pray tell, j_b, do you have a handle on "how [my] words and actions affect this forum"? Have you taken polls of the many posters here? Are you again invoking "everyone"? This ethereal mass of humanity that no one can touch, but you seem to have your fingers on the pulse of their opinion. Apparently, my words are within the guidelines of acceptance on this board, as they have not been deleted nor have I been censured. Your attempts to isolate me seem to ignore this fact. You do not speak for everyone and you certainly don't speak for me. Speak for yourself and leave it at that. Another note, you have not seen me take action yet so this point is a baseless attempt to muddy waters that are, to date, pretty calm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 perhaps mmoore does not get everything 100% right, Well if you are a doc film maker, that is your job. You have to get everything right. the problem is that for you, "right" means "with scott harpell's bias". all documentary movies have bias to pretend otherwise is deceptive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 J_B... grow a fucking pair. Of course it was a metaphor. He didn't say he was gonna shove a boot up your as or soemthing... he said he was gonna squamsh you with reality.... Be a man and take care of it. If you had a question about it, buck up and ask greg. Don't do this whistle blower shit when you don't even know what you are talking about. Pathetic another standard technique used by abusers on this site and the real world: "be a man, grow a pair". as if being a man meant not taking offense at anti-free speech behavior. let's assume for a moment that in your simple frame of thinking, i am a 'coward', or let's say that i am reserved and timid. more than likely i would not respond or reveal greg_w's tactics and make sure to move along as far away from the dude as possible. how can it be reasonable that the bully be left standing in control of the "discussion" while mister coward/timid sees his freedom of expression curtailed? are you saying that might/intimidation is right? I wasn't suggesting you brush off anit-freepeach behavior but rather if you have a problem with someone... deal with it... this is not kindergarden where you have the teacher to bail you out of every little problem you run into. That is why you need to grow up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squid Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 (edited) greg: if you ever thought that you could tell me in a private message: "[snip]" and not suffer any repercutions, you need to reassess your mode of participation to this board (to put it mildly} Edited September 30, 2004 by snoboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 perhaps mmoore does not get everything 100% right, Well if you are a doc film maker, that is your job. You have to get everything right. the problem is that for you, "right" means "with scott harpell's bias". all documentary movies have bias to pretend otherwise is deceptive. It is not bias when CDC facts are manipulated, the 'bolwing' namesake for the movie is fraudulent, not WMD's are made in the littleton Lockheed factory. These are not elements of "bias" they are bold bold lies... and you fell for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 greg: if you ever thought that you could tell me in a private message: "i can't wait to crush you under the boot of reality" and not suffer any repercutions, you need to reassess your mode of participation to this board (to put it mildly} Ok... does anyone think this implied physical abuse at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Lauer Interview Read this and see the way that Moore expands the boundaries of truth and purposefully avoid information that would harm his cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 (edited) greg: if you ever thought that you could tell me in a private message: "[snip]" and not suffer any repercutions, you need to reassess your mode of participation to this board (to put it mildly} What repercussions have I suffered? Your blathering on is definitely annoying. Are you some internet cop or something? Now who is attempting to suppress speech? You have a problem, deal with me. Don't cry to the hall monitors or the masses that "the big bad bully pushed me down!" That is why you are weak - you cannot stand on your own or stand up for yourself. You must invoke the crowd. I would posit that a discussion of this matter would have gone vastly different if handled privately. Yet, you do not have the ability to do that, do you? You are weak, ineffectual, and crying wolf. Tell me what repercussions I have suffered? What authority has come down on me for what I wrote? Tell us all, j_b, since you aired this publicly. Even the moderators who are your political and ideological allies won't touch this - there's nothing to touch. Give it a rest. I'm done here. Wanna talk? See me at Rope Up, which I doubt you will do. Don't say on Monday that you couldn't find me; plenty of people know what I look like. Greg_W Edited September 30, 2004 by snoboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squid Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 all y'all can stfu now. you're boring me. Otherwise, you're gonna look pretty fucking silly when a stick-figure cartoon kicks your ass at the rope-up. bygones. much love, hugs and kisses, see you soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratboy Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Like this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squid Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I think I just threatened a bunch of people. Am I banned yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobBob Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Sooooo...j_b.... can I come over and watch the debate with you tonight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjd Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 And by the way, they are both extremists (literal definition: "those who would advocate or resort to measures beyond the norm"). since when is it in the norm to "preemptively" invade and lay waste to another country for reasons that have turned out to be pure fabrications? edit: could you point out one thing mmoore advocates that is beyond the norm? Whether or not it is in the norm to invade another country is not the point. This entire thread went completely away from where I had hoped it would . Michael Moore would have you believe (as I stated earlier) that life in Iraq before the U.S. invaded was all "rainbows and butterflies." He would mock a person (the President) for a perfectly normal reaction to hearing news that the U.S. had just suffered the worst attack since Pearl Harbor. He would imply that somehow the Bush administration was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks and that somehow the President's ties to Saudis would somehow give him the motivation to allow potential criminals to leave the country (the Bin Ladens after 9/11) . As it turns out, it wasn't even his (Bush's) decision - it was Richard Clarke. I would say that Michael Moore either hates George W. Bush so much that he will distort facts to paint HIS picture or he is just a whore for money and notoriety. Either way, he is an extremist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Whether or not it is in the norm to invade another country is not the point. first, the point is to determine was is normal behavior, then decide on that basis what is extreme. you fail to do so, by declaring moore an extremist without considering whether his behavior departs from 'normal' and without considering whether, say bush's, departs from normality. the behavior of the neocons departs much more from 'normality' than anything that moore has advocated for. this points to the hypocrisy of your argument and thus your agenda. Michael Moore would have you believe (as I stated earlier) that life in Iraq before the U.S. invaded was all "rainbows and butterflies." not true. it's not because moore did not discuss saddam's atrocities in f911 that he says what you claim he says. f911 is about 9/11 and the response of this adminstration to a terrorist attack. He would mock a person (the President) for a perfectly normal reaction to hearing news that the U.S. had just suffered the worst attack since Pearl Harbor. bush knew what was going on before he stepped into that classroom and didn't react for 7 minutes (or however long it was) after hearing of further attacks. a decisive leader which bush claims to be would have excused himself, and consulted with his staff on whether all appropriate measures were taken since more attacks were possible. what was he thinking? my staff is taking care of the problem and i can keep reading "my pet goat" to pre-schoolers? He would imply that somehow the Bush administration was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks simply not true. and that somehow the President's ties to Saudis would somehow give him the motivation to allow potential criminals to leave the country (the Bin Ladens after 9/11) . legitimate question that, many others have asked, considering the business ties between the 2 families and the 2 countries. have you heard of the riggs bank scandal? As it turns out, it wasn't even his (Bush's) decision - it was Richard Clarke. funny how clarke also tells that whatever he said about anti-terror measures was summarily dismissed prior to 9/11, yet on this matter he was allowed to decide unilateraly to let go of people who may have had valuable info to provide. I would say that Michael Moore either hates George W. Bush so much that he will distort facts to paint HIS picture or he is just a whore for money and notoriety. Either way, he is an extremist. moore is biased like everybody else, that does not make him an extremist, and his positions are a lot more 'normal' than that of many in the present adminsitration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snoboy Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Stop making work for me, or I'll get grumpy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjd Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 You have completely missed the point of this thread. I was simply making a joke about two political commentators from opposite ends of the spectrum. This was meant to be a funny thread, not a discussion about what constitutes extremism, defining norms, or partisan bashing. However, since we have descended into the 9th circle once again, I'll continue the worthless banter. As an aside, I find it funny that nobody, save johndavidjr I believe, has contended the extremist label of Sean Hannity. Michael Moore displayed video of children flying kites and celebrating before showing images of battle induced destruction. That is pretty clearly sending the message that "life is good" with the status quo. bush knew what was going on before he stepped into that classroom and didn't react for 7 minutes after hearing of further attacks Really? I seem to recall he was notified while in the classroom, am I mistaken? Being decisive doesn't mean failing to consider what you are being told. Criticizing him for sitting there for 7 minutes is just ridiculous to me. How much did he know right then? What else might he have been thinking about? Perhaps he was wondering about the extent of the damage, who is doing it, do I have family/friends there, where is my family right now, etc etc. You have no idea what was going through his head, and criticizing him over 7 minutes is nonsense. He went a long way to show both the connections to Saudis and his (President Bush's) supposed consolidation of power after the attacks. He sure seemed to be hinting at the possibility, based on what he presented. How exactly does the Riggs Bank scandal play a part? The fact of the matter was that Richard Clarke made the decision - not George W. Bush. funny how clarke also tells that whatever he said about anti-terror measures were summarily dismissed prior to 9/11, yet on this matter he was allowed to decide unilateraly to let go of people who may have had valuable info to provide. That isn't relevant to the question of whether Michael Moore is extreme or not, nor is anything that the current administration did or did not do. Michael Moore is an extremist because he will distort facts and images greatly in order to show his bias. Do you recall his shenanigans with Bowling for Columbine, in which he spliced together images and speeches of Charlton Heston in order to make it look like Heston said what you see in the film? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 snoboy: i see now that making pm's public are officially against board policy. mark me down against such broad rule as it enables abusers under the cover of privacy; the fear of public exposure is precisely the reason why such comments are not made in the public forum. the sending of barely veiled threats, by a group of posters that everyone is familiar with, has been a recurring problem on this board. as i have made clear, i personally won't be intimidated and will make it known if i continue receiving threats in pm's for discussions that take place in the public arena. greg: i don't care one way or another if you are going to rope up. interpret it as you wish, but i am not interested in meeting or discussing with you face to face. furthermore, from now on, any of your pm's will go unread by me. so don't bother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I was simply making a joke you are free to pretend that jokes don't mold public perception and i am free to know better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 j_b, you make me laugh. You're so fucking tense, I'm sure your ass could shoot diamonds. I'd love to meet you just to see what a sadsack socialist freedom-hater like you looks like. If it's any consolation, most die-hard communist/socialists are unhappy deep inside. Greg_W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 You wanna know what one looks like Greg? The subject of this story is one... Who is Michael Moore? While Moore portrays himself as a poor white boy from the corporation-devastated streets of Flint, Michigan, he is not. He was born in Davison, Michigan, a fairly affluent suburb of Flint. He attended private, parochial schools until age 14 when he switched to the Davison Public High School. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 While his loathing of Bush was obvious and completely accepted by that crowd, he called the Democrats "a miserable, pathetic party that can't win an election even when they win an election." As John Kerry?s daughter sat dumbstruck in the crowd, Moore told a story of a screening for students where he asked all those planning to vote for Nader to raise their hands, and half the young voters put their hands up. Moore then declared that Nader "doesn't give a [expletive] about anybody but himself." ...and here is what he thinks of y'all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjd Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Germany, he mused that since America is full of such ignorant people, how could it be that such fools were able to rise to power? Moore laughed that Americans always have a ?big a-- grin on our face all the time, because our brains aren't loaded down." He said that the American system is so flawed that Germany should never consider trying to copy it but stay on their correct socialist path. In England, he told a reporter that Americans were possibly ?the dumbest people on the face of the planet.? Moore scoffed at the passengers on the doomed planes and called them cowards for not fighting back. He stated that had there been black people on those planes, they would have overpowered the hijackers. Moore never mentions the fact that there were Black Americans on those planes. He also overlooked the fact that the passengers on Flight 93 did fight back and sacrificed their lives to save others. Moore proclaimed in October, 2003, that ?There is no terror threat in this country. This is a lie. It's the biggest lie we have been told.? I would call this less-than-normal behaviour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.