Just saw Farenheight 911

[bluedolphin]

Saw it a few hours ago....thought it would have been grittier....wasn't really suprised by what was said, shown and insinuated....perhaps Im looking thru jaded eyes... what did others think?

[WaldoMcFroog]

Aye, but it's clearly intended for a US audience. Don't forget the whole rigging of the elections was barely mentioned in the US press; over here it was widely discussed. The same with a lot of the other issues discussed.

The US press is free in terms of legal restrictions, but it has a very narrow corridor of interests and opinions that it will allow into the papers and onto the airwaves. And this is only natural. The media is owned by large corporations and therefore their interests are the same as large corporations - they are not going to give over much time to people and ideas who act against those interests.

Naturally, it's the same here in many respects, but our press is a little more adventurous.

[WaldoMcFroog]

But if you do look at moorewatch, remember that is is bankrolled by arch republicans and has its own agenda. I would certainly never deny MM has an agenda in 911, but as for the cries of it being factually incorrect, the arguements are themselves typical *********** theory garbage, with huge leaps of logic. Have a look on MM's site, where he provides extensive notes detailing his sources. You can verify these on the internet. One may not like Moore's interpretation of the data, but the data itself appears to be sound.

I honestly wasn't aware that there was anyone outside the US who didn't believe the last US election hadn't been fraudulently won after a court declared a winner before all the votes were in - the simple matter of the other guy getting more votes seems to swing it for me - but there you go!

[WaldoMcFroog]

Why has "con spir acy" been asterisked? Surely I didn't misspell it that badly?

[el duerino]

watched it with a sympathetic eye but was far too simplistic for my liking. It covered the basics, threw in some emotions and hey presto. There was really nothing in it that was uncovered by investigative journalism for the film, I knew almost all of it simply by following the news.

[Drewhound]

I thought he could have done a good factual film and made his points, as it was he got as bad as they did. As el duerino says it didn't uncover anything new we didn't know before. Their voting system in some states is a scandal, I nearly fell off my chair laughing when Mugabe said it was corrupt, he's probably right as well. Overall I think the film was a waste of time, the americans don't look at anything they think they may not like which is why they've got a press that's as bad as it is. They don't print or broadcast the news, just what they think the punter will like

[MrsCheeks]

I found it distasteful when he made insinuations about Bush's private income being invested in the Bin Laden company ... basically trying to say that Bush is guilty of helping to finance a known terrorist! Well, if that were the case then my father would have been arrested on terrorism charges because for many years he did business with the Bin Laden Corporation in Saudi. What was NOT mentioned was the fact that Osama was stripped of his Saudi citizenship over a decade ago, and is never allowed to set foot in the country of his birth again. Tarring his entire family with the same brush, and anyone who does business with them is disgraceful. Rather like saying that all Irish people are terrorists. As far as scaremongering and propoganda goes, MM gets 10 out of 10. For being a decent human being, he is as bad as Bush for twisting the facts to sout.

[WaldoMcFroog]

Ansteyg, don't you think that it's deeply lazy to brand anyone who disagrees with you as 'jumping on a bandwagon'? To diminish the legitimacy of anyone to hold an opinion contrary to your own says more about you than them. Is it so impossible to conceed there might be a case to answer, that there are legitimate gripes?

Could it not conceivably be that, having a sound understanding of the situation, some people think Bush has something to answer for? It's not as though there's no basis for this point of view.

Do you not think that the disenfrancising of black voters (traditional democrat voters) indicated electoral fraud on a grand scale? For instance, up to a third of the ballots cast in Jacksonville Florida's black precincts were tossed out, four times more than in neighboring white precincts.

Before Florida was declared, Gore led in the Electoral College with 266 votes to Bush's 246 votes. When Bush was declared the winner of Florida by 537 votes, he picked up 25 Electoral College votes which gave him the Presidency. State Kathleen Harris and Governor Jeb Bush illegally removed 57,700 voters from the rolls. It is estimated that 90% were Democratic. It seems self evident to me that if this is indeed the case, it is a very serious matter for democracy. There is extensive evidence of excellent providence to support the notion that something underhand occured. As a civilised society, the citizens of the US surely have the right to expect the democratic to work according to the rules set down. It seems it hasn't and they feel cheated.