Dear Mike (Michael Moore)

[RandFan]

Nice derail Manifesto and Ion.

Anything to keep us from goring your sacred cows. Why deal with the topic of the thread when you can shift focus, right?

 

[Number Six]

I've liked Moore in the past but less so now not because of the views he espouses per se but just because he's become so political. He's about to release his new movie and I think there's a pretty good chance it will essentially be a 90 minute fillm berating those that disagree with him and that won't necessarily be strictly true throughout but which instead will manipulate and/or invent facts in a manner that makes the people he wants to look bad to look bad.

Now there is nothing seriously wrong with that in itself. The manipulation is annoying becuase it's so hard to get truth these days but Michael Moore is far from the only one that does that stuff. But he who lives by the "documentary" that makes fun of others shall die by the "documentary" that makes fun of others. It was obvious (to me at least) that if Moore kept doing his thing then eventually someone would turn the tables and do the same thing that Moore does except with Moore as the subject. That's life. Moore will keep doing his thing regardless.

I do think it makes Moore look bad to not talk to the filmmaker. The thing is, Moore has to know that how refusals to talk can be made to look in films since he's done it to others so many times and yet he still refuses to talk. I can't help but wonder what he thinks they could ask him that will make him look even worse than he'd look by refusing to talk.

Moore should talk to the filmmaker while insisting that the entire interview be filmed and made available later so that the filmmaker can't take things out of context or twist things. Then again, if Moore insisted on that then anyone he interviewed ever again would insist on the same when asked to be interviewed by Moore and as a consequence Moore's filmmaking process would become unwieldy. Maybe all things considered Moore is doing the best thing for himself...not talk and let it all blow over.

 

[Number Six]

Oh, and I forgot to mention something...I find it ironic that the person making this film about Moore actually look like Moore (to my eyes at least).

 

[KelvinG]

I was just watching MTV and a reporter said the award was not a surprise given the politics and current environment. Apparently he didn't get the memo that politics and French sentiment did not play a part. No, its not proof that I am correct but it is proof that most will see it this way for obvious and correct reasons.

There are any number of reasons as to why the French are so angry that we deposed a murdering dictator who raped, tortured and maimed hundreds of thousands of his own people.

A third of the French people wanted Saddam to be victorious. They wanted Americans to die and Saddam to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces.

You tell me why?

Where are you getting this number that a" third of the French people wanted Saddam to be victorious....wanted Americans to die and Saddam to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces."
Was a poll done that asked these questions specificially?

 

[Nasarius]

Where are you getting this number that a" third of the French people wanted Saddam to be victorious....wanted Americans to die and Saddam to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces."
Was a poll done that asked these questions specificially?

Don't bother, just let RandFan continue to abuse his strawman. No sense arguing.

 

[KelvinG]

Don't bother, just let RandFan continue to abuse his strawman. No sense arguing.

I'm starting to think so. For a guy who is constantly berating others for not being critical thinkers, Randfan's above post makes some outrageous assumptions and has no basis outside his own bigoted personal opinion.

 

[ceo_esq]

Where are you getting this number that a" third of the French people wanted Saddam to be victorious....wanted Americans to die and Saddam to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces."
Was a poll done that asked these questions specificially?

Well, I can tell you that here in France there was a poll published in Le Monde in spring 2003 that did specifically ask respondents which side (Coalition or Saddam) they hoped would prevail militarily. If I recall correctly, slightly more than half of the respondents answered that they hoped the Coalition would prevail, roughly one-third answered that they took no sides in the militarily conflict, and about one-quarter answered that they hoped Saddam's military would defeat the Coalition. This result was embarrassing for the government here.

Since military defeat at the hands of Saddam would obviously have resulted in significant American casualties and the prologation of an oppressive regime, that part of RandFan's post is substantially accurate - except that, as I mentioned, I think the number was one-quarter rather than one-third.

 

[KillerBob]

I would imagine he's talking about this:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/1844360

 

[Ion]

Well, the point of this thread is what you posted that French's attitude doesn't surprise you, I asked about the French attitude and you answered this:

Not the point of the thread. But to answer your question, not emperically and I don't think they are.

Empirically the French (Chirac) said that war was to consider once every alternative was exhausted.

Bush went to war before that and he is wrong.

The French are right, and make fun (with me) at you and Bush.

 

[Ion]

Nice derail Manifesto and Ion.

Anything to keep us from goring your sacred cows. Why deal with the topic of the thread when you can shift focus, right?

Where did I derail your thread RF?

I answered what you posted.

 

[Ion]

Where are you getting this number that a" third of the French people wanted Saddam to be victorious....wanted Americans to die and Saddam to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces."
Was a poll done that asked these questions specificially?

RF makes this up.

 

[KelvinG]

Well, I can tell you that here in France there was a poll published in Le Monde in spring 2003 that did specifically ask respondents which side (Coalition or Saddam) they hoped would prevail militarily. If I recall correctly, slightly more than half of the respondents answered that they hoped the Coalition would prevail, roughly one-third answered that they took no sides in the militarily conflict, and about one-quarter answered that they hoped Saddam's military would defeat the Coalition. This result was embarrassing for the government here.

Since military defeat at the hands of Saddam would obviously have resulted in significant American casualties and the prologation of an oppressive regime, that part of RandFan's post is substantially accurate - except that, as I mentioned, I think the number was one-quarter rather than one-third.

I was not aware that such a poll was done. Thus, I apologize to RandFan for saying his personal opinion was "bigoted." I do wonder, though, if 1000 people is enough in a poll to be representative of a country as large as France.

I've never been big on the war in Iraq and I believe it was waged under fraudulent circumstances, but I never have wished for American casualites (or any casualites for that matter).
It's a little disturbing that anyone would wish a victory for Saddam's army!

 

[Questioninggeller]

If anyone out there knows Michael Moore will you pass this on to him? It seems Michael is as spineless as Roger Smith.

Yeah... I'm sure he'll take it seriously from a website called "Michael Moore Hates America." It's like his critics aren't even trying anymore. They call him fat, a liar, hates guns, hates America, ect., ect. Should we expect Bush take a site seriously when it is called, "Bush hates America." Anyone bother to think, maybe he loves his country and the people in it and feels Bush is doing the country harm?

The movie trailer looks like it's just a personal attack on him, unlike "Roger and Me" which is about a town. The interview chase in "Roger and Me" is just to hold the film together and make it comical. Unlike this film which is solely based on an attack on Moore and his work.

Speaking of which who is funding this film? I couldn't find any info.

 

[Ion]

...
Thus, I apologize to RandFan for saying his personal opinion was "bigoted."...
...

The poll says:

"...However, a third of the nearly 1,000 people interviewed by the pollster Ipsos for Le Monde newspaper said they did not want United States and close ally Britain to triumph..."

RF said:

"...a third of the French people wanted Saddam..." "...to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces..."

Once again, RF is unsubstantiated.

 

[ceo_esq]

It's a little disturbing that anyone would wish a victory for Saddam's army!

That's this country for you. There are some serious biases here and, frankly, a questionable grasp of the Iraq war and its implications.

Actually, I would be surprised, if push came to shove, if so many French would actually be glad if Saddam had prevailed. I think that some of the respondents in that poll were probably just mouthing off and indulging in a little schadenfreude fantasizing - both time-honored French pastimes.

 

[KelvinG]

The poll says:

"...However, a third of the nearly 1,000 people interviewed by the pollster Ipsos for Le Monde newspaper said they did not want United States and close ally Britain to triumph..."

RF said:

"...a third of the French people wanted Saddam..." "...to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces..."

Once again, RF is unsubstantiated.

I'm not saying RandFan's post was totally valid, and it certain was delivered during some serious venom spitting, but I felt my characterization of him as "bigoted" was unwarranted considering I did not know of the poll he was talking about.

I agree that RandFan did make assumptions about what some French are thinking in his post, and I don't think they were logically thought out.

 

[demon]

ceo_esq:
"That's this country for you. There are some serious biases here and, frankly, a questionable grasp of the Iraq war and its implications."

Who in your view has the most serious biases and most questionable grasp about the Iraq invasion and it`s implications, the French or the Americans?
For example, do you know how many of the French believed that Saddam was connected with 9/11 or that he had WMD that could be launched at them within 45 minutes?

 

[ceo_esq]

The poll says:

"...However, a third of the nearly 1,000 people interviewed by the pollster Ipsos for Le Monde newspaper said they did not want United States and close ally Britain to triumph..."

RF said:

"...a third of the French people wanted Saddam..." "...to continue to oppress his people while he spent the oil for food money on palaces..."

Once again, RF is unsubstantiated.

I hate to point out the obvious, Ion, but for Saddam to have repelled the Coalition invasion would have meant that he'd remain in power, and few people (even in France) would dispute that this would mean he'd continue to oppress his people and divert oil revenues toward building palaces. RandFan was making a perfectly defensible inference from the poll results, and many people in France pointed out the same thing after that embarrassing poll was published.

 

[KelvinG]

That's this country for you. There are some serious biases here and, frankly, a questionable grasp of the Iraq war and its implications.

I think this is common everywhere. Do most people really have an idea of the true horrors of war. I certainly don't.

Actually, I would be surprised, if push came to shove, if so many French would actually be glad if Saddam had prevailed. I think that some of the respondents in that poll were probably just mouthing off and indulging in a little schadenfreude fantasizing - both time-honored French pastimes.

I agree. I'm willing to bet that most of the people who voted that they hoped Saddam would triumph were doing so more out of spite for America than an actually affinity for Saddam.
And let's face it, the spite has been a two way street. Look at all the trash that gets talked about the French on this site, and all over the USA.

 

[RandFan]

Now, regarding Bush who has been caught lying while killing people, that's serious...

We're not talking about Bush now are we?