Has Michael Moore become a full blown Truther?

Abdul Alhazred said:
Admittedly no more than an impression -- but wasn't Michael Moore saying "trooferish" things even before there was such a movement?

Like right after the 9-11 massacre?

I'm pretty sure there was some kind of controversial pronouncement, but I do not remember the details.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


He raged on his website about the unfairness of killing all those people in a state that "didn't even vote for Bush." The resultant outcry persuaded him to remove the offensive comments pretty quickly, but you get the idea.
 
boloboffin said:
I missed the part where I jumped on anyone here for being a Crazy gun-nutter or a Bush lover. You will be so good as to point that passage of mine out to me? I would hate to think that you just pulled a Michael Moore on me.
Click to expand...

Right after you point out where I said I was talking about you.
 
pomeroo said:
He raged on his website about the unfairness of killing all those people in a state that "didn't even vote for Bush." The resultant outcry persuaded him to remove the offensive comments pretty quickly, but you get the idea.
Click to expand...

He was also high critical of them going into Afghanistan and then in 9/11 he blasted them for taking so long to act.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Right after you point out where I said I was talking about you.
Click to expand...

So when you were justifying your refusal to provide a link to me because doing so only gets you false accusations from fanatical leftwing supporters of Michael Moore, you weren't talking about me?
 
As an aside, Sicko is well worth seeing, especially if you're an American.
 
I think Moore is a bit too circumspect to come out swinging for "teh Truth". He doesn't want to give his political enemies the ammunition.
 
No, I was justifying it in that fact that if you really wanted to find them you could using a search engine in less time that it took for you to post here, and that it wasn't worth it because you'd just look up the pro-moorse sites that attack the anti-moore sites and call them right wing Bush patsies and use them to say Moore was right and his detractors are wrong and we'd be right back where we started.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
I think trying to mislead people by selectively eliminating evidence and facts is wrong on any level. I only have one category for that behavior. I don't see a scale for that. I can maybe put the people who unintentionally mislead in one category, and people who intentionally mislead in another.

MM is one of those people, like Dylan who intentionally tries to mislead people. I hear he breaks that method in Sicko, but we'll have to wait and see. But fraud is fraud to me.
Click to expand...



This is pretty much my point of view.

For the record, the cartoon in Bowling For Columbine, which incidentally was written by Michael Moore, quite clearly claims that the KKK became the NRA:

(from about 2 mins in)



-Gumboot
 
Pardalis said:
Michael Moore is a traitor.
Click to expand...
Pardalis, you're getting ridiculous.

Tell you what, if your claim is true, you shoudl be able to show the USA government that, and they can prosecute Moore for treason.

Of course, that would only work if your claim is actually true, and not simply demented crap.

If you can't see what's wrong with inflated, nonsensical claims, I can't help you, and no-one else can either.
 
Michael Moore also said:

"There is no terrorist threat."

-Gumboot
 
Abdul Alhazred said:
Admittedly no more than an impression -- but wasn't Michael Moore saying "trooferish" things even before there was such a movement?

Like right after the 9-11 massacre?

I'm pretty sure there was some kind of controversial pronouncement, but I do not remember the details.
Click to expand...

In his "Seven Questions for George Bush" which was published in Dude Where's My Country? in 2003, he proposes a rather bizarre theory that the 9/11 attackers were trained by the Saudi Air Force. Granted, he frames these all as "questions."

You got us all repeating by rote that it was Osama bin Laden who was
responsible for the attack on the United States on September 11. Even I was
doing it. But then I started hearing strange stories about Osama's kidneys.
Suddenly, I don't know who or what to trust. How could a guy sitting in a
cave in Afghanistan, hooked up to dialysis, have directed and overseen the
actions of 19 terrorists for two years in the US then plotted so perfectly
the hijacking of four planes and then guaranteed that three of them would
end up precisely on their targets? How did he organize, communicate, control
and supervise this kind of massive attack? With two cans and a string?
Click to expand...

And

would like to throw out a possibility here: what if September 11 was not a "terrorist" attack but, rather, a military attack against the United States? George, apparently you were a pilot once - how hard is it to hit a five-story building at more than 500 miles an hour? The Pentagon is only five stories high. At 500 miles an hour, had the pilots been off by just a hair, they'd have been in the river. You do not get this skilled at learning how to fly jumbo jets by being taught on a video game machine at some ******* flight training school in Arizona. You learn to do this in the air force. Someone's air force.

The Saudi air force?

What if these weren't wacko terrorists, but military pilots who signed on to
a suicide mission? What if they were doing this at the behest of either the
Saudi government or certain disgruntled members of the Saudi royal family?
Click to expand...

Full article here. I brought this up in another thread about Moore, and none of his supporters said anything about it. I have no idea why he hasn't been taken to task for this, but he should be.
 
boloboffin said:
I continue to hear a lot of claims about Michael Moore's sins, but precious few have stepped up to provide examples and citations.

This is not the settled question you think it to be.
Click to expand...

There are a lot, but I stopped paying attention to Moore so long ago that I forget most of the issues.

I remember seeing Bowling for Columbine I think it was where he was touting how the NRA was so callous as to have a convention in the area just after the shooting occurred and how insensitive it was of them to do that.

But what he left out was that they were contractually obligated by the city to hold the convention and were not allowed to postpone it. To add insult to injury, Moore then proceeds to show clips from a much older convention showing them saying suggestive things. Well, they were not suggestive in context of the convention that was being shown. but the editing and use o the wrong footage was done to make it appear as if they were talking about the Columnbine shootings.

The average person watching would have no way to know that this was not a muchb older convention being shown and that the clips were in no way making such references since they happens so much earlier. They are completely mislead here.

THAT is just one of 100s of examples (and I may be getting it a little wrong) of complete dishonesty that is being portrayed as a documentary. And at the time of me watching it, I believed every word he said and fell for every editing trick he used. I am angry with him for trying to trick me and others.
 
You know, when we bitch about truther quote mining and editing videos creatively to alter context in support of the agenda they are pushing, they are only following in the well worn path Moore has paved for them.
 
pomeroo said:
I can't figure Conspi out. He seems to understand the idiocy of the fantasy movement well enough. But he goes off the deep end with Perry-Logan rants against anything that doesn't conform to his prejudices. His passionate love for a bunch of unprincipled hacks is a mystery to me. I tend to vote Republican because I find the Democrats so objectionable: they seem to regard a person's earnings as government property; they frame every issue in terms of groups, rather than individuals; they are reflexively anti-military and dangerously weak on national security. Still, if I ever found myself claiming to love the Republican Party, I'd take a good long rest.

What does Conspi think about the threat of Islamic terrorism? He strongly favors pulling out of Iraq. Does he want Iran to obtain nuclear weapons? Does he think America is an "imperial" power? I have no business putting words in his mouth, but I wish he'd tell us what he thinks about the jihadist threat. Why would a vet have anything good to say about a thoroughly dishonest America-basher like Michael Moore? Moore called the murderous savages ravaging Iraq "freedom fighters." Does Conspi disagree with that characterization?
Click to expand...
Your ignorance, Ron, is so transparent that only zealous idealism can be pointed to as the culprit. You certainly cannot claim youth as an excuse for your ignorance. You're an oldster like me. Yet, like a small child, you view the world in the harsh contrasts of black and white.

It is your exceedingly narrow viewpoint that is responsible for you making such pathetically ignorant statements such as Democrats being "dangerously weak on national security". And don't be shy. You DO love the Republican Party. Or rather, what it has become - what it has been hijacked into. Time and time again, your posts illustrate undying adoration for the criminals that are the Bush Administration. You, Ron, are one of the 29 percenters still propping up the criminals. Too bad for you that us 71 percenters have unmasked these thugs. And you, Ron, cannot accept the fact that Bill Clinton, despite being impeached by the House, had an approval rating that never dipped below 50 percent. Hurts, doesn't it? Bill Clinton can wade into any crowd of people, anywhere in the world, and be overwhelmed by the affection and admiration of the folks in such a crowd. Your boy Bush? When he leaves office, he'll need an armed escort just to pick up the newspaper on his front lawn each morning.

What you so completely fail to realize, in your rabid zeal, is that Bush, with his insane "mission" to smash and overtake Iraq, has created an untold number of jihadists, and future jihadists, that never would have gone that route had the path to such madness not been blazed by Stupid-Boy himself. When 9/11 happened - instead of us Americans being able to count on steady, intelligent and reasoned response from our president; instead of our president exploiting the capital that our country had earned (before him) in the world to combat terrorism; instead of our president appointing the shrewdest experts available to deal with the complexities and ramifications of confronting our actual enemies: he did what he did. And he now has the distinction of having directly caused - through his war fever aimed specifically at the country that was NOT involved in 9/11 - the deaths of more Americans than Osama bin Laden. With tens of thousands grieviously wounded.

So, would you like to explain to me once again why my opposition to such a leader is akin to "passionate love for a bunch of unprincipled hacks"?

Your hero - Bush - does NOT fight the jihadists. He invents them, instigates them, provokes them. Give me some reasons as to why he would do this.
 
I actually started to defend Moore, because I think he's right about a lot of things. But after doing a little detectigoogling, I can't really defend the dishonest way he goes about making the points.

I focused on Bowling for Columbine. It looks to me like he could have made the same 'culture of fear' arguments without the misleading splicing which is his most common unethical tactic.

eta:Thanks for the links Alareth.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
But what he left out was that they were contractually obligated by the city to hold the convention and were not allowed to postpone it.
Click to expand...



It was more than that. They were required to hold the meeting by New York state law. They could change it if they notified all members at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, however the NRA has 4 million members and the shooting occurred only 11 days before the meeting.

What Moore also neglected to mention was that the NRA cancelled all planned events except the legally obligated members vote.

Michael Moore is nothing more than a more talented, more popular, better funded Dylan Avery.

-Gumboot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom