Fahrenheit 9/11 looking back

jamtemplechains

onelongsong wrote:

no; he's using sensationalism and fiction to line his pockets. if his facts (?) were correct; and his motives to inform the public; he wouldn't be charging you to see the information. he makes $ millions off the sheep; as they blindly follow.

as my previous posts suggest, he's a man who might have began with sincere intentions, but became a victim of his own success. in case you missed any, maybe check out some of the points i came across and posted here on my longer post on the previous page. and keep in mind this is all coming from someone who FOR THE MOST PART respects the messages relayed in moore's films. it IS true that he exhaggerates certain points, and embellishes some information nearly to the point of making it untrue, even if it is all for some greater purpose to inform the general public of things that should change.

onelongsong

jamtemplechains wrote:

as my previous posts suggest, he's a man who might have began with sincere intentions, but became a victim of his own success. in case you missed any, maybe check out some of the points i came across and posted here on my longer post on the previous page. and keep in mind this is all coming from someone who FOR THE MOST PART respects the messages relayed in moore's films. it IS true that he exhaggerates certain points, and embellishes some information nearly to the point of making it untrue, even if it is all for some greater purpose to inform the general public of things that should change.

i respect your opinion but i don't think he's sincere; or ever was. thousands are still making money from 9/11 and i see them as vultures. i'm the first person to take advantage of a situation to make a buck; but not at the expense of the dead. if his information was verifiable and true; the media would have carried it. i remember when sicko was released. several media sources including CNN spent a lot of time proving most of it as lies.

Its Evolution Baby

onelongsong wrote:

no; he's using sensationalism and fiction to line his pockets. if his facts (?) were correct; and his motives to inform the public; he wouldn't be charging you to see the information. he makes $ millions off the sheep; as they blindly follow.

Movies don't just show up in theaters or video stores for free. You have to pay the projectionists and concession stand workers and ticket sellers, etc. Only producers and studios make money after a movie is released. Most talent (actors, directors, etc) are paid before the movie is made and then get a % of residuals if they are lucy. Moore does co-produce his films so he does have some stake in the success of his films but not as much as you state.

For example Sicko was a semi flop following Fahrenheit's sucess but it doesn't mean it cost Moore his money but the studio and investors there money.

The point of all this is that you're a little off base with your post.

jamtemplechains

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

Movies don't just show up in theaters or video stores for free. You have to pay the projectionists and concession stand workers and ticket sellers, etc. Only producers and studios make money after a movie is released. Most talent (actors, directors, etc) are paid before the movie is made and then get a % of residuals if they are lucy. Moore does co-produce his films so he does have some stake in the success of his films but not as much as you state.

For example Sicko was a semi flop following Fahrenheit's sucess but it doesn't mean it cost Moore his money but the studio and investors there money.

The point of all this is that you're a little off base with your post.

what about some of the disengenous things moore did (as compared to the ideals he spouts) that i mentioned?

Its Evolution Baby

onelongsong wrote:

thousands are still making money from 9/11 and i see them as vultures.

I 100% agree with this part of your post.

cough cough.....Dick Cheney.....cough cough....

jamtemplechains

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

I 100% agree with this part of your post.

cough cough.....Dick Cheney.....cough cough....

dick cheney who made a shit load of money off of halliburton, which michael moore's irs documents show to have over 2000 shares of?....

Its Evolution Baby

jamtemplechains wrote:

what about some of the disengenous things moore did (as compared to the ideals he spouts) that i mentioned?

I did not talk about the accuracy of Moore's works in my post. As a film major i disagree with how he presents his arguements. His films are more propaganda then documentories. I am a fan becasue I find him funny and agree with a lot of his stances. I do wish he was more accurate in his portrayls but he goes for entertainment over accuracy.

I think its funny that the main people who call him out on this come from Fox News who are the kings of entertainment over accuracy.

BTW I know CNN went after his last film... but not as much or as vicious as Fox News.

Its Evolution Baby

jamtemplechains wrote:

dick cheney who made a shit load of money off of halliburton, which michael moore's irs documents show to have over 2000 shares of?....

You're right. Micheal Moore should pracitce what he preaches.

I did not know about the halliburton stocks which is just shameless, if true.

That does not change the fact that no one has made more money off a tactically stupid war then Dick Cheney. The same Dick Cheney that said in 1990 and 1994 we should not go into Iraq because it would become a Quagmire. That is worse then someone making some money off of a movie about the subject.

jamtemplechains

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

You're right. Micheal Moore should pracitce what he preaches.

I did not know about the halliburton stocks which is just shameless, if true.

That does not change the fact that no one has made more money off a tactically stupid war then Dick Cheney. The same Dick Cheney that said in 1990 and 1994 we should not go into Iraq because it would become a Quagmire. That is worse then someone making some money off of a movie about the subject.

oh i couldn't agree more, i just like kickin up some shit i assure you the stock shares thing is true...but you're absolutely right, dick cheney is definitely about 343,455,387,455 times worse than moore could ever be. at least moore does corrupt things and makes dirty money getting good messages across.

chopitdown

even flow? wrote:

There is more then one point. Such as the senators actually looking over the same bullshit pictures that we saw on the news and believing them to be true. They knew what was going on.

Second: Moore was pointing out that the rich would not enlist and probably be the first to wave their white flags, grow their beards and pull out the praying mats if and when you ever got invaded.

Funny you say they are 18 and can make their own decisions which I agree with. But not one stepped up to the plate with a smug look to claim that. Run, run, run and send the lessers to the slaughter.

Kind of like the senators putting on their protective jackets the other day when they were fired upon in Iraq. Where were those for the boys and girls sent over there to protect your valueable way of life.

For the most part the only people who seem to harp on Moore are the same people who like war from this side of the ocean.

i agree with a lot of your post here except re: the people who harp on moore dont nec like war; they jsut don't like how mm goes about things.

chopitdown

my2hands wrote:

if this is the "epic struggle of our time between good and evil"

you would think that more politicians would push their kids to enlist... like the bush girls.

or perhaps that is all just a lie, and they fucking know it. just like any body else with a brain knows it is bullshit

maybe the politicians do push their kids to enlist, but the kids choose not not? I wont disagree that it's easier to send other kids off to war etc... but the fact that people are bitching about senators not signing their kids up or forcing them to is just dumb.

Bu2

callen wrote:

it really is sad....actually more than that scrary...just tells you how easy it is for big brother to get into peoples minds....we are such simple mamals.

are simple. *I hope*

RolandTD20Kdrummer

onelongsong wrote:

no; he's using sensationalism and fiction to line his pockets. if his facts (?) were correct; and his motives to inform the public; he wouldn't be charging you to see the information. he makes $ millions off the sheep; as they blindly follow.

Funny how nothing Moore presented in f 9/11 was considered slanderous or disputed in a court of law, (or even brought forward as slanderous in casual conversation.... or the media).

Isn't that interesting....or one could just say entirely factual.

who's sheeping who?

Bu2

onelongsong wrote:

no; he's using sensationalism and fiction to line his pockets.....he makes $ millions off the sheep; as they blindly follow.

Or Bush?

gue_barium

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

You're right. Micheal Moore should pracitce what he preaches.

I did not know about the halliburton stocks which is just shameless, if true.

He doesn't own any stock in Haliburton or anything else. That whole story is a crock.

jeffbr

gue_barium wrote:

He doesn't own any stock in Haliburton or anything else. That whole story is a crock.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47174

(I'm not a worldnet daily kind of guy, but figured since they are linked here so often, I'd oblige)

jamtemplechains

gue_barium wrote:

He doesn't own any stock in Haliburton or anything else. That whole story is a crock.

anyone who would like to investigate on their own, feel free to do so. it's all documented in publically accessible irs documentation. a foundation owned entirely by michael moore and his wife had nearly 300,000 dollars in corporate stock, and around 100,000 dollars in corporate bonds. the irs doesn't provide faulty or untrue documents...they provide what people declare...he also had DOCUMENTED stock ownership in Sunoco, Noble Energy, Schlumberger, Williams Companies, Transocean Sedco Forex and Anadarko...hmmm...a few companies he bashes in 'dude, where's my country'...many of these stocks, by the way, were purchased with the 15% profit moore made from selling his shares in halliburton. he also had DOCUMENTED stocks and shares in defense contractors honeywell, boeing, and loral. keep in mind, all these stocks that added up to 8 figure finances were owned through moore-and-wife's foundation (supposedly charitable) that only gave away 36,000 dollars from all of that 8-figure goodness.
so....no...not a crock. sorry.

gue_barium

jamtemplechains wrote:

anyone who would like to investigate on their own, feel free to do so. it's all documented in publically accessible irs documentation. a foundation owned entirely by michael moore and his wife had nearly 300,000 dollars in corporate stock, and around 100,000 dollars in corporate bonds. the irs doesn't provide faulty or untrue documents...they provide what people declare...he also had DOCUMENTED stock ownership in Sunoco, Noble Energy, Schlumberger, Williams Companies, Transocean Sedco Forex and Anadarko...hmmm...a few companies he bashes in 'dude, where's my country'...many of these stocks, by the way, were purchased with the 15% profit moore made from selling his shares in halliburton. he also had DOCUMENTED stocks and shares in defense contractors honeywell, boeing, and loral. keep in mind, all these stocks that added up to 8 figure finances were owned through moore-and-wife's foundation (supposedly charitable) that only gave away 36,000 dollars from all of that 8-figure goodness.
so....no...not a crock. sorry.

This is BS.

gue_barium

jeffbr wrote:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47174

(I'm not a worldnet daily kind of guy, but figured since they are linked here so often, I'd oblige)

Every website only cites the book that makes the claim. The book is BS.

jamtemplechains

gue_barium wrote:

This is BS.

i love your intellectual argument that presents such bulletproof information. you have so many figures and references, i don't even know where to begin! 'this is a crock'....'this is BS'.....any other insightful tidbits you'd like to grace us with, or just taking the short and sweet route.
how do you call information that CAN BE VIEWED BY ANYBODY AND RELEASED BY THE IRS a crock or BS? that's just retarded, man...it's there to see....there's a thousand articles on this shit and NOT ONE REFUTING IT!! what have you got besides frustrated responses that contribute nothing?

gue_barium

jamtemplechains wrote:

i love your intellectual argument that presents such bulletproof information. you have so many figures and references, i don't even know where to begin! 'this is a crock'....'this is BS'.....any other insightful tidbits you'd like to grace us with, or just taking the short and sweet route.
how do you call information that CAN BE VIEWED BY ANYBODY AND RELEASED BY THE IRS a crock or BS? that's just retarded, man...it's there to see....there's a thousand articles on this shit and NOT ONE REFUTING IT!! what have you got besides frustrated responses that contribute nothing?

We are on page 4 of this debate and you have yet to provide a link to your "proof." The only link provided thus far on this topic only cites an author's work.

I think that author fabricated his evidence on Moore.

As for Moore's reaction, he thinks it's "funny."

RolandTD20Kdrummer

re: MM/Haliburton...

http://raleigh.craigslist.org/pol/411391643.html