The Moore Bashers

There is a certain level of extreme hatred and hostility on certain parts of this forum regarding Michael Moore that is a bit mind-boggling. I can understand criticism, and Moore is certainly not perfect, but he is bringing up hard questions that nobody else wants to discuss in the popular media--and he is making people think & is inspiring debate. I thought that would be a good thing, better than people just not mentioning these topics at all in the news or around the watercooler.
Moore criticisms I have heard:
1. He is a fat bastard: real mature, pick on his physical appearance.
2. He is a greedy bastard who is making a lot of money off of his movies: making money over movies and books that he worked hard on? perish the thought! what a greedy man!
3. He is unpatriotic: this one really throws me. how does a man who is trying to educate people on the contents of the Patriot Act and other things that might limit our freedoms unpatriotic? is he unpatriotic because he doesn't support the war? because he doesn't support this great great war? and what happened to freedom of speech? if posters don't want to be exposed to discussions that might be considered (under this narrow definition) "unpatriotic," then that may cancel out a whole bunch of threads on ATS itself--maybe we should ban those threads as "unpatriotic."
4. There are some factual errors in his work: there are some factual errors in reports by CNN, The New York Times, and other news organizations. not to mention that in big media outlets, some news that might be important for us to read see in order for us to get the "big picture" are routinely "left out" so as not to offend advertisers or to seem "unpatriotic" (there's that pesky word again)
5. His work is slanted towards a certain (left-wing) viewpoint: there is no news or information that we receive that has not gone through the lens of a particular viewpoint. if you don't think that the news you get from the major media outlets aren't "skewed" towards a certain viewpoint, then you are really naive.

What's the real deal for all the extreme hate? Is it simply because he was a regular guy interested in current events like the rest of us who made good following his dream? Because he's the type of guy who would have frequented boards like ATS, expressing his passionate opinions--and who decided to take this passion one step further and work really hard and create something that not only impacts a modest-sized internet community but the whole country? How dare he win an Oscar & a Palme D'Or? What a sell-out! What a greedy bastard!

Instead of wasting energy burning this man in effigy or cracking jokes about his girth, why don't we take our own passion for news, the truth, and making a difference in this world, and actually find ways to make a difference in this world? ATS is a wonderful start: what else can we do?

(and the flaming starts...NOW!)

[edit on 26-6-2004 by Cassie Clay]

Originally posted by Cassie Clay
Instead of wasting energy burning this man in effigy or cracking jokes about his girth, why don't we take our own passion for news, the truth, and making a difference in this world, and actually find ways to make a difference in this world? ATS is a wonderful start: what else can we do?

Well said, Cassie Clay, you've summed it up in a nutshell. I look forward to hearing debate on the points you've made. This may well be a lively discussion and a good one - as long as members count to 10 first.

The "extreme hate" simply reflects the current polar attitude of the entire country. More so than ever before, the lines are drawn between liberal and conservative, and it seems the more extreme your direction (left or right) the better. At some point, hopefully, this centrist hopes the extreme right/left will move from shouting to dialoge and end up learning something.

First of all, I'm not gonna flame you - what's the point?

Second, my view is that he is capitalising off his infamy - countless others do it I know, this doesn't make it right, I'm just discussing Moore here - and this capitalisation is one of the things that he's against, how can people take his views seriously, they're never going to know now if he's in it "just for the money" - chances are he isn't, but you'll never really know.
The thing that gets me the most is that so many people are going to see his latest movie, just because it's been branded a bad thing, not because they believe him and want to know more (monkey see, monkey do). I'm not going to go and see it, not just because the idea of sitting there watching the subject matter bores me but because, really, he's not bringing anything new to the table, just taking an oblique angle on the whole thing.

Just my 2 cents...

I dont have a problem with Michael Moore personally, I do have a problem however telling a very limited part of the story of 911

Here are some facts that for some reason did not make itinto the final cut of "Fahrenheit 9/11"

www.whatreallyhappened.com...


But we all know,,,your a racist and anti-semite if you critizize Israel or question the incredible jewish lobby that pulls alot of strings in Washington DC and media.





EDIT: copy-and-paste post removed, link to material inserted.

[edit on 26-6-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Originally posted by project_pisces
I dont have a problem with Michael Moore personally, I do have a problem however telling a very limited part of the story of 911

Here are some facts that for some reason did not make itinto the final cut of "Fahrenheit 9/11"

On 9-11, five men were arrested for suspicious behavior, cheering and laughing while the WTC collapsed. In the van police found cash, multiple passports, and maps with the World Trade Center highlighted. Bomb-sniffing dogs indicated explosives residue were present in the truck. The arrested men were Israelis, later identified by Pacific Radio as agents of the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad. According to Carl Cameron's FOX News story on the Israeli spy ring, the US Government classified evidence that linked the arrested Israeli spies to 9-11. The Mossad agents were using a moving company, Urban Moving Systems, for a cover. The owner of the company, Dominic Suter, abandoned his business after 9-11 and fled to Israel on 9-14.

The 9-11 scene was littered with passports using Saudi names, passports which the FBI admitted just ten days later were high-quality fakes using identities stolen from Arab men. We don't know who was on those planes, only who we were supposed to THINK were on those planes. Why would Saudi Arabia commit 9-11 and use phony passports pointing back to themselves? If Saudi Arabia had done 9-11, it is safe to assume the phony passports would have likely pointed to Israel. FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted in public that there is actually no evidence that proves the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft.

The warnings of the attack sent to Odigo in New York and Israel before the 9-11 planes had even left the ground confirms beyond question that Israeli-linked companies did receive advance warning. Why would Saudi Arabia warn Israeli companies if they were behind 9-11?

It wasn't a Saudi-owned company in charge of security at all three of the 9-11 airports.

If Saudi Arabia was a partner with Al Qaeda for 9-11, why is Al Qaeda carrying out terror attacks against the Saudi Royal family now?

Speaking of "Al Qaeda", when Palestinian police arrested an Al Qaeda cell, they discovered they were holding a group of Mossad agants.

A final point: The nation that helped the US Government stage a fake terror event to launch wars of conquest in the Mideast would be in an ideal position to blackmail the US Government with that very secret. So, look back over the more than two years since 9-11 and find the nation for whom the US Government just cannot seem to do enough, cannot give enough money and weapons, cannot block enough UN Resolutions, the nation for whom a long standing neutral foreign policy has been cast aside in favor out total support for an expansionist agenda. Find the nation whose leaders openly brag of their control of the US Government.

If Michael Moore didn't quite do all his homework with regard to who may have been behind the 9-11 attack, that does not change the fact that the people of the United States were lied to to trick them into wars. And it is THAT message of the film which is the important one. But the hard fact remains that Michael Moore did not get ALL of the story of 9-11. Not by a longshot. "Fahrenheit 9/11" is just the tip of the iceberg.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment of just George Bush. Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment of just Republicans. Fahrenheit 9/11 is an indictment of the entire US Government that had to know Bush was lying to the American people to initiate as war and stood there smiling blandly while he did it. Like Hitler, Bush could not do what he did without a lot of cooperation by the entire government and the media. Look at the voting records for the authorization for the use of force in Iraq and in the draconian assaults on our freedoms. Both parties voted those "Ayes". The rush to war and dictatorship was a bipartisan one, worthy of bipartisan blame. Everyone is spinning Fahrenheit 9/11 to attack their own favorite scapegoats, but the truth is there is more than enough blame for the current state of the nation to share all around.


But we all know,,,your a racist and anti-semite if you critizize Israel or question the incredible jewish lobby that pulls alot of strings in Washington DC and media.

project_pisces, practically your entire post is a verbatim quote from The Part of the 9-11 Story Michael Moore Missed!.

Extensively quoting a source like this without giving attribution or a link is plagiarism, pure and simple. I have quoted your entire post so you cannot cover up your plagiarism by editing your post to include a link.

In the future, please acknowledge your sources and include a link.


[edit on 6/26/2004 by donguillermo]

Cassie Clay you go girl

project_pisces you are right it is only the tip of the iceberg.

The Moore bashers are angry because they are being hit where it hurts and their messiah is being shown a fraud with factual information they can't disprove or deny.

All there is to it.

All most of these people CAN do is hurl insults at him and nothing more.

It's like the villain in cartoons yelling back at his mortal enemy while running away after a fight with his tail between his legs. "I'll be back! You @^$"

lol

Originally posted by Cassie Clay
There is a certain level of extreme hatred and hostility on certain parts of this forum regarding Michael Moore that is a bit mind-boggling.

I am reminded of an old attorney adage that goes something like this,

When the law is with you, argue the law.
When the facts are with you, argue the facts.
When both the law and facts are against you, yell and beat your fist on the table.

The bashers of moore and supporters of bush are left with nothing except yelling and fist beating. Humanity is not a liberal or conservative issue, it is sad so many people see it in political terms.

Excellent post Cassie.

[edit on 26-6-2004 by df1]

I can't find the thread where someone asked about the Moore interview on the Daily Show, but I wanted to post the link somewhere. I guess "Moore Bashers" is appropriate all things considered.

What struck me was how the person seemed to think Jon Stewart was great and Mike Moore a liar, thinking Stewart would set him straight. If I read that wrong I apologize...as I said I can't find the comment now since this forum exploded.

But still they hadn't seen the interview, and were asking how it went.

The first half is on Comedy Central here. But I'm really upset they don't show it all.

Toward the end (not on clip) when Jon gets "serious" he asks Moore about the criticisms that he unfairly edits, uses out of context footage and chooses the time and place to attack specifically to embarass people...there's a really funny awkward silence as I recall.

At which point Moore and Stewart both laugh and Moore "bows to the Master".

It is what the Daily Show does. It's also what Weekend Update on SNL does. And to some extent, it's what CNN and FOX do too.

The irony of the interview though was how each is received for doing the exact same thing. I seriously doubt Jon Stewart gets death threats for running footage of Bush stumbling on "ABU GU- RAB". And no one makes web sites to call Stewart a big nosed America hatin' Jew, or some other physical criticism like Moore enjoys. So why does Mike get bashed so hard?

I actually think I understand why he does, but like Mike says in the interview "If any right wing groups out there are listening (laughter) PLEASE keep doing what you're doing."

When the law is with you, argue the law.
When the facts are with you, argue the facts.
When both the law and facts are against you, yell and beat your fist on the table.

Splendid, df1, thank you!

It sums the anti-Moore fanaticism up perfectly, I think. Republicans can't defend their lying, stupid, thieving, traiterous-bastard "President", so they attack Moore like it's important he's overweight.

By far the funniest thing, however, is they way they get all red-faced and whine "but it's not fair!" Of course it's not fair! Why the hell should it be fair? Moore didn't set out to tell the balanced, even-handed story of why "some people" think Bush is a lying election-scamming moron - he set out to make an entertaining, accurate film about why "some people" are right!

I for one would like to shake Moore by the hand and congratulate him on a job well done. Making Republicans apopleptic? Good work!

And SkepticOverlord, I admire you optimism, but it seems that the chances of rational debate on the left vs. right issue is getting less, not more, likely.

I think that Fahrenheit has to be seen in context of his earlier works.
Moore bashers tend to label him as "anti-republican" or "anti-bush", but the truth is completely different. Anyone who has seen or read his earlier works like Roger And Me or Downsize This knows his real agenda. He bashed Clinton administration the same way he is going after Bush now.
All his works also contain a slight hint of humor, some more then the other, the irony and sarcasm of this world. It is an interesting way to present the facts, thats for sure.
Moore is generaly pissed off at greedy capitalistic bastards that run this world, and he is absolutely right. (I think it was in Roger and Me that he embarased that Nike guy).
It is ALL about money and power, nothing else. Companies are competing who will downsize more and in that process it is not the CEOs who are suffering in any way, it is the simple working class. They are outsourcing jobs to third world, a modern form of slavery, those people work for a few dollars a day, no health insurance, no social benefits and they dont complain because even that is more then they usualy have.
Everything Moore has filmed and wrote attacks such policies in various ways. Only Bowling for Columbine has a bit different topic, and no it is NOT gun control, it is FEAR ( those who actually watched it, understand what I am talking about ).

A part of Stupid White Men attacks the way goverment works directly, you cant deny the reality of Florida election fiasco, the involvment of various big companies etc, etc. The rest is again about ruthless capitalism practices. ( no, I am not a communist, i am a liberal socialist democrat, and last time I checked that was not anti-american or anti-democratic or anti-freedom, or terrorist-loving )

I can't say anything about Fahrenheit 911 because I haven't watched it yet. But I assume it is full of facts and data and it makes greedy capitalistic bastards and goverment look really really bad

Were to begin:

The Moore movie is a hit piece if I ever saw one. Its timing, the tone of its message, etc. Is just another attempt by ultra liberals in Hollywood to try to force thier agenda on the US public. I am tired of actors and other celebs who feel that they are right simply by the virtue of thier fame.

That being said, there are alot of un-answered questions about 911. Nor would I expect Moore to be able to address them all. Nor would I expect him to mention the Israel connection either. . As mentioned earlier, they have a large lobby and know how to spend money to influence both politics and media.Actually since 911 alot of people have been pointing out the facts mentioned in the movie. Moore is just the first person with alot of influence to bring it mainstream

What do I want more information on?
1) Why did it take so long for US fighters to get into the air? Once up, most were unarmed and the only way for them to down the planes was to RAM them. If you recall when Payne Stuarts plane failed to make a turn and answer hails it was intercepted within minutes. They also were armed and prepared to shoot it down if it threatned a city.

2) The Israel connection. The report of the ex-mossad agents in the van taping is pretty disturbing. Also, the reports of Mossad activities in the US lead to alot of questions. Israel had the most to gain by 911.

You all think Michael Moore is not a liar and exagerated facts trying to sell his books/movies...

Well, a new book has come out which brings forth the lies Moore has been telling the American public and the exagerations and outright lies. He is claiming that he will sue his critics now, which will probably include his publisher, ReganBooks.

Here is a excerpt of the new book which brings the truth about Michael Moore and the lies he perpetrated to make money from what he calls "stupid Americans."

" Does not play well with others: Moore can't get along even with his fellow travelers.

Hardy and Clarke disclose how the radical magazine Mother Jones fired the "arbitrary" and "suspicious" Moore; how he started his feud with his replacement, David Talbot, who later founded Salon; how Ralph Nader's organization fired Moore; how he attacked Pauline Kael, Harlan Jacobson and other prominent critics who exposed the deceits of his schlockumentaries; how he lost a lawsuit for betraying fellow lefty activist Larry Stecco in "Roger & Me," etc.

Nor can the elitist Moore tolerate those lowly working classes and students he claims to represent.

"Big Fat Stupid White Man" gives details of how he abused the staff during a speaking engagement at London's Roundhouse Theater; how he castigated a student who dared question his hefty speaking fee; how he attacked a young documentary maker who had the nerve to give him a taste of the "Roger & Me" treatment, and so forth.

And don't forget his amusingly shrill denunciation of those awful blue-collar crewmen who, unlike his fellow multimillionaires in Hollywood�s left, booed him during his tirade at the Oscars.

The book presents one example after another, alternating between frightening and hilarious, to make a brilliant case for Moore having Narcissistic Personality Disorder."

Excerpted from.
www.newsmax.com...

----Edited to correct misspelling---------


[edit on 28-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Moore bashers are indeed only bashing because their views are being threatened. Change is not preferred for most humans. If they hear something contrary to what they originally believe, they will most often fight it even if they do in fact know they themselves are wrong.

And the fact is, you cannot get a balanced story in politics from anyone. There is always a tilt from one extreme to the other and finding the truth is not plausible without also including the influence of opinion.

Moore is indeed, slanted; but who on earth is not?

i dont know if i'm considered a "moore basher" but i dont like the guy one bit.

to purposely take footage, edit hack and splice them together to make a person say or convey soemthign the person never said or conveyed initially is not only misleading but is an outright lie.

such is the case of bowling for columbine and charlton heston. he took excerpts and bits and made them seem like heston is a gun toting maniac making threats and having a coniption fit.

the gun he purchased at k-mart? yeah we know the "truth" about it well after his propaganda already convinced other people that guns are bad and that what happened at coubine was the fault of the gun makers and the NRA. he didnt just go in and buy the gun, he was screened and had checks done on him well in advance of any filming of that, but he never mentioned that in his "documentary" did he?



moore himself admits that these are not documentaries, they are his opinion. what really bothers me is he says this but the media keeps saying documentary. this isnt moore's fault though. what IS his fault is he has called his movies anything but documentaries and then has no shame in accepting documentary awards for his films that he admits are not documentaries. THAT is what bothers me about him.

he really is no different than the news outlets or any other political pundit IMO, he's just another one of them. he isnt special and what he does isnt any more truthful or "hard hitting" than a rush limbaugh news letter.

the inconsistencies is what i dont like about him. he tells us these arent documentaries but they all of a sudden become documentaries when an award is offered. and of course he wouldnt turn it down, an award helps boost his propagana campaign. just like hanity or limbaugh would do and have done.

and like them he has some people fooled into thinking he a presenter of truth which is so much BS. he is no more full of the truth than rush limbaugh is. he takes bits and pieces that fit his agenda, ignores excludes and omits everything else and then tries to present it as the truth. well he might be right in saying its the truth but is it the WHOLE truth? does it present all the facts in any given issue he's presenting to us? no.

moore doesnt present facts and truth, he presents an idea or an ideology that backs up what some people think and believe, nothing more. those who like him like him because it reenforces what they want to believe, those who bash him mindless do so because what he does has the opposite effect.

i'm not going to bash him for what he does but i certainly dont like what he does but i also dont like what the media does and what other political pundits do, so he isnt alone in this. he is but a part of a bigger problem.

Cassie Clay - Right on, good points!

Project_pisces - Exactly!
As soon as anyone says anything remotely negative or incriminating about the allmighty and great state of Israel, they are labeled an anti-semitic or a racist or whatever. Typical retort from those who fear to believe what we have all been programmed not to believe!

Donguillermo - Project_pisces clearly posted a link to whatreallyhappened.com and I do not see any plagairism here. Fire up another doobie!

By the way, does anyone here note that all too often, the moderators on ATS fail to see things the same way as the majority? I thought this was a conspiracy based site but I see very little replies in support of these views from the moderating superiors. Aaaahhh! I see....that is why they are moderators.

Originally posted by The Merovingian

Donguillermo - Project_pisces clearly posted a link to whatreallyhappened.com and I do not see any plagairism here. Fire up another doobie!

I suggest you fire up another doobie. Go back and look at my post. I quoted project_pisces' entire post, and you can see there is no link in it.

Go back and look at project_pisces' post. You will see that SkepticOverlord edited the post by removing the copy-and-paste and inserting a link. The edit by SkepticOverlord occurred after I exposed the plagiarism by project_pisces.

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
to purposely take footage, edit hack and splice them together to make a person say or convey soemthign the person never said or conveyed initially is not only misleading but is an outright lie.

such is the case of bowling for columbine and charlton heston. he took excerpts and bits and made them seem like heston is a gun toting maniac making threats and having a coniption fit.

I just clipped those points to comment on, because #1 (Moore edits) is pretty much the entire argument against him and #2 (Heston Video) is always the example given as "proof" Moore is lying.

#2 The Heston Video: The most recognizable icon of Heston today and even the entire NRA is old crazy Charlie holding up his gun at a rally screaming "FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS". The NRA uses this image to PROMOTE themselves. And indeed, sent the old guy all over the country expressly to do the one thing many people come to rallies to see. Why would showing what he does, and the NRA is all about bother the NRA?

The argument is: Moore didn't film the rally in Colorado 10 weeks after Columbine. He used footage from the NC rally a year later.

Keep in mind this big "lie" we're discussing is about 5 seconds of footage in a 2 hour film. But fine, Moore probably wasn't even making BFC 10 weeks after Columbine and used current footage he got while making the movie a year later. Whatever. "No excuse" right? Because it made the NRA look bad. Showing their own behavior they do at every rally made the NRA look bad. Interesting, but whatever. What I've never heard anyone from the NRA say is at the Colorado rally right after Columbine we didn't act like crazed militants. We only did that the 50 years prior and started up again after leaving Columbine (as evident by Moore's film of NC). Is that what they're saying? Moore made us look bad, but we weren't bad that day...just every other day? I mean they must be ashamed of how they act or they wouldn't bash Moore for showing it? It is how Heston acts at NRA rallies. (Or did act, since retiring in shame after BFC).

But nevermind the fact Moore never says "this footage is from the Colorado rally". The NRA DID have their rally, and did have Heston speak which Moore points out and asks Heston about in the interview. But Moore probably wasn't even on the case 10 weeks after Columbine, so he used stock or recent footage. BFD. That makes Moore guilty of doing the exact same thing every news program in the world does.

The tell a story about the President addressing the Firefighters Union, then show the picture of him walking in front of a firetruck from 2 years ago. THOSE LIARS!!!!!! I know, I know...Moore meant to make heston look like a nut. Fine. But how showing what he does at 99.99 percent of NRA rallies (assuming he didn't do it in Colorado) contorts the truth is beyond me.

Anyway, is Moore a documentarian? I say either he is, or nobody is. The editing and bias and showing one side stuff is universal.

Watch any "award winning" documentary. They have an agenda, and tell a side. They show the starvation in Ethiopia, concentrating shots on dying people and hovels. They dont' show the new hotel or supermarket behind the camerman. Or a documentary on the suffering of abused kids. COME ON. Those "liars" never show the pedophiles side. It's all slanted to make the kids look like the good guys.

I'm done. Nobody's going to read this anyway.

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
the gun he purchased at k-mart? yeah we know the "truth" about it well after his propaganda already convinced other people that guns are bad and that what happened at coubine was the fault of the gun makers and the NRA. he didnt just go in and buy the gun, he was screened and had checks done on him well in advance of any filming of that, but he never mentioned that in his "documentary" did he?

By the way, it's been a while since I saw BFC but I'm pretty sure Moore bought ammo at K-Mart and got his free gun at a bank where they do say you need a background check and he comes back later to get it. All in the film.

I think your sources of Moore info may be the propaganda here.

[edit on 28-6-2004 by RANT]