farenhype 9/11

[jdev]

anyone see this?

Appears to be in response (obviously) to the farenhiet 9/11 movie moore did.

check it out here:

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/index.php

[Cougar]

Another goody (http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/)

[Eagle]

You know what pisses me off about Moore? He's constantly the US government, and he's CANADIAN! Nothin against Canada, I mean they gave us Pam Anderson and TK nemesis William Shatner, but this is one turd we don't need. :cuss:

[spantol]

You know what pisses me off about Moore? He's constantly the US government, and he's CANADIAN! Nothin against Canada, I mean they gave us Pam Anderson and TK nemesis William Shatner, but this is one turd we don't need. :cuss:

While there are a metric buttload of reasons to hate Michael Moore, this isn't one of them. He's a natural-born citizen, born in Flint, Michigan.

[SCpoloRicker]

/chestnuts warming o'er a flame war fire...

[Lesta]

Anyone care to elaborate? Or are we just going to leave this as vague as possible, with simply allusions to an actual arguement? This is starting to look like an O'Reilly Factor episode.

[logamus]

This is starting to look like an O'Reilly Factor episode.
with alot less phone sex.

[Hasty8]

How's this?

Moore's films are NOT documentary, they are propaganda.

Documentary - Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.
Propaganda - Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.

Moore's films are propaganda simply becuase Moore has never, ever, EVER in his life, so much as once presented his "facts" (and I use the terms very loosely) in anything that could even remotely be construed as "objectively".

One has only to watch Bowling For Columbine once to see that.

This webpage very clearly demonstrates Moore's love for "nonfiction"
Truth About Bowling (http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html)

One thing that I absolutely laughed hysterically at in BFC was when Moore made the totally asanine statement that the NRA and the KKK were formed at the same time and by essentially the same people.

In fact this could not be any farther from the truth.

The KKK was born on Christmas Eve, 1865, when six Confederate soldiers, just out of uniform, met in Pulaski, Tennessee, to form a secret fraternal order. Deriving its name from the Greek word "kuklos"(circle), the organization was originally social in nature. Soon, however, the group began terrorizing Blacks by raiding their homes at night while wearing white sheets (their horses were sometimes clad in sheets as well).

ADL - Origins of the KKK (http://www.adl.org/hate-patrol/kkk.asp)

The NRA, on the otherhand, was formed in 1871 in NEW YORK STATE as a simple shooting club. In fact, their original field was not 250 feet from where I live now!

Moore is avile, repugnant slug and is in desperate need of a serious bout of ebola or some other flesh eating bacteria!

[Destructo6]

Moore's films are NOT documentary, they are propaganda.
Actually, they are a particular type of ducumentary, the expose. It typically has a political purpose and does not presume to present all of the facts objectively.

Unfortunately, the general public has difficulty distinguishing Moore style expose from other documentary genres that do search for truth.

But you're basically right, Moore's films are not unlike "Olympia" and "The Eternal Jew."

[lather]

Actually, they are a particular type of ducumentary, the expose. It typically has a political purpose and does not presume to present all of the facts objectively.

Unfortunately, the general public has difficulty distinguishing Moore style expose from other documentary genres that do search for truth.

But you're basically right, Moore's films are not unlike "Olympia" and "The Eternal Jew."


Good post. FOX news falls dangerously close to this style as well. Although as a "news" format as opposed to a documentary.

[FactsOfLife]

Good post. FOX news falls dangerously close to this style as well. Although as a "news" format as opposed to a documentary.


Horsecrap.

God forbid a news orginization has a conservative on their broadcast.

Wanna talk agendas?

I have two words for you.

Dan Rather.

[Hasty8]

Horsecrap.

God forbid a news orginization has a conservative on their broadcast.

Wanna talk agendas?

I have two words for you.

Dan Rather.


FOL, until Winchell came along, the news was just that, the news. It was Winchell who really dove into using the newscast to shape and mold public opinion.

Personally, I think debate shows benefit from having opposing view points but NEWSCASTS should be impartial in how they represent facts and that is just not the way things are today.

[FactsOfLife]

I just ordered my Mikey Moore-on action figure! WOOT!

http://www.businessfundamentals.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/Sumo%20wrestler.jpg


I actually do not mind a bias in the reporters. The difference between FOX News and the others, is FOX News admits to their bias, and will present the other side.

Nightline's idea of presenting the other side is to go to Viet Nam and talk to the VC who "witnessed" John Effing Kerry's Silver Star incident.

This is the typical manner in which ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN present their "news". It is also the reason that FOX News is kicking their backsides in the ratings.

[lather]

Horsecrap.

God forbid a news orginization has a conservative on their broadcast.

Wanna talk agendas?

I have two words for you.

Dan Rather.


You obviously havent seen Fox employees chanting "four more years!" at the RNC did you?



For a Conservative, I find it a surprisingly naive world view that you think Bill O'Reilly and Fox news dont have an agenda of their own.

[Rebel46_99]

You obviously havent seen Fox employees chanting "four more years!" at the RNC did you?



For a Conservative, I find it a surprisingly naive world view that you think Bill O'Reilly and Fox news dont have an agenda of their own.

If you read FOL's post carefully, he never said FOX didn't have an agenda. What FOX doesn't do is try to portray themselves as totally impartial like some of the sanctimonious buttheads such as Rather and Peter Jennings, do.

DW

[lather]

If you read FOL's post carefully, he never said FOX didn't have an agenda. What FOX doesn't do is try to portray themselves as totally impartial like some of the sanctimonious buttheads such as Rather and Peter Jennings, do.

DW

Whoa wait a minute...

Fox doesnt try to potray themselves as totally impartial??

Fox News Slogan--- "Fair and Balanced"???

Sounds to me that Fox is claiming to be impartial. I might be wrong as my grasp of the English language may not be as complete as yours.

Im just surprised at the naivete of some people who think only liberals like Moore tell half truths and agendas. The other side does it just as well if not better.

I agree Rather and Jennings are sanctimonious buttheads.

I also think that O'Reilly is a self-righteous butthead.

[rehme]

go to infowars.com if you want the truth and he proves it

[Rebel46_99]

That's why FOX uses the term, "Fair and Balanced", because they don't make the outright claim of being impartial. I see Fair and Balanced as allowing the other side to be represented on a regular basis, as in the case of Hannity & Colmes.

How many of the other News channels have a Hannity & Colmes? How many would allow a Conservative/Republican (other than Tim Russert) to grill a Liberal/Democrat, i.e. ala the way Colmes works on FOX or Chris Mathews on MSNBC. It ain't gonna happen. And if they're out there, I don't see them. And Dennis Miller from CNBC doesn't count. Miller is an admitted Conservative since 9/11, but his show wasn't built along the same lines as H&C and Hardball.

Tim Russert, IMO is probably the best at what he does without being a total arse cutting people off and shouting them down like that meathead Chris Mathews. While Zell Miller may have come off to some as being from a different planet the night of the Republican National Convention, when Mathews tried his usual tactics, Miller basically told him to shut up or the interview was over. I believe that needs to happen alot more often than it does. You can be respectful, ask your questions and keep hammering for answers without those tactics.

And I agree, although I like O'Reilly's slant on some things, he is a self-righteous butthead.

DW

[FactsOfLife]

You obviously havent seen Fox employees chanting "four more years!" at the RNC did you?



For a Conservative, I find it a surprisingly naive world view that you think Bill O'Reilly and Fox news dont have an agenda of their own.


Show me evidence of this.

And did you, or did you not read my post where I JUST SAID FOX has an admitted bias? And that I didn't mind it?

:rolleyes:

[1stdeadeye]

Lpts of TOOLin around here! :rolleyes: