| Author | Message | ||
     Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7860 Registered: 10-2001 |
Today 9/7 the spoken word BUSH: "9/11 lifted the veil on a threat that is far broader and more dangerous than we saw that morning: an enemy that was not sated by the destruction inflicted that day and is determined to strike again. To answer this threat and to protect our people, we need more than retaliation, we need more than a reaction to the last attack. We need to do everything in our power to stop the next attack. And so America has gone on the , and here are some of the results. We've captured or killed many of the most significant Al Qaida members and associates. We've killed Al Qaida's most visible and aggressive leader to emerge after 9/11: the terrorist Zarqawi in Iraq. We've kept the terrorists from achieving their key goal: to overthrow governments across the broader Middle East and to seize control. Instead, the governments they targeted, such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, have become some of the most valuable allies in the war on terror. These countries are joined by the largest coalition in the history of warfare: more than 90 nations determined to find the terrorists, to dry up their funds, to stop their plots and to bring them to justice. This coalition includes two nations that used to sponsor terror but now help us fight it: the democratic nations of Afghanistan and Iraq. (APPLAUSE) In Afghanistan, President Karzai's elected government is fighting our common enemies. And showing the courage he's showing, he's inspired millions across the region. In Iraq, Prime Minister Maliki's unity government is fighting Al Qaida and the enemies of Iraq's democracy. They're taking increasing responsibility for security of their free country. The fighting in Iraq has been difficult and it has been bloody, and some say that Iraq is a diversion from the war on terror. The terrorists disagree. Osama bin Laden has proclaimed that the Third World War is raging in Iraq. Al Qaida leaders have declared that Baghdad will be the capital." This as libs scream about a made for TV movie Reid: "they started off, this as being a documentary, they change it to a docu-drama, and now its a work of fiction, and that's what it is and yes, they should pull it. Its interesting, as i understand it, this so called film, has no commerical interruiptions, isnt that interesting? I spoke to Mr iger yesterday, told him i thought that this was unfair." Libs are morons. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5776 Registered: 5-2001 |
Conservatives have no standards, no ethics, only greed. Here's what Intellectual Conservative had to say about the Reagan miniseries a few years ago:
How about this instead:
Here's RNC Chair Gillespie on the Reagan minipic, as reported on Fox:
Are there two standards or just one? Are you intellectually honest or merely opportunistic? Are your principles what you say they are, or is the only principle you have power? Are you really concerned with freedom of speech, you who supported Ari Fleischer when he said Americans had to "watch what they say"? | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7861 Registered: 10-2001 |
Like I said Tom, libs are wasting the time of Americans whining about a made for tv movie. Bunch of pointless knuckeheads. Rove will have a field day with this one. | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 404 Registered: 3-2006  |
You really have nothing to say, do you? | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7862 Registered: 10-2001 |
Son, I've had this converation before with new posters much like yourself. Here's what you need to understand. It's important for you to create your own identity. Avoid attempting to handcuff yourself to some of the more recognized posters such as myself. Look, you want to come off as a sharp liberal, on top of world events, looking to make a difference. You'd like to influence others with your opinions and that's why you keep coming back to MOL. Instead, you've become addicted to what I have to say and as a result, everything you post deals directly with the Great Straw.. Be creative, be unique and in time there's a chance you may be taken seriously someday. THE GREAT STRAW IS A PROUD AMERICAN. | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 405 Registered: 3-2006 |
Straw, Boy, you're really self-delusional, aren't you? You talk tough, invite a response, I (and others) offer one in the spirit of intelligent debate, yet you're never able to acknowledge/address/reply to a point in return. You make a big noise, but you always run away when somebody counters whatever vitriol you spew. If you were trying to sound impressive or convey some sort of MOL "authority" just now, please know that you failed miserably. You did succeed in looking ridiculous, though. Congratulations. By the way, your earlier display of:
didn't help you, either. Cheers, -p37- | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7864 Registered: 10-2001 |
You seem to be a slow learner. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5871 Registered: 8-2003 |
What was the line back with Fahrenheit 911? "While I don't subscribe to everything in the movie, it nonetheless raised interesting issues." Let's let that hold true here, and those backing Clinton the Defender make their case in the media outlets that will print their press releases and forged documents without verification. | ||
| dave23 Citizen Username: Dave23 Post Number: 1983 Registered: 5-2001 |
cjc, Who said that? Oh yeah, and why isn't the government investigating who forged those documents? Whoever did it would be facing decades in prison. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5779 Registered: 5-2001 |
I've got a better idea: let's hold true the example of CBS and "The Reagans." I mean, RNC Chair Gillespie, for heaven's sake, said on Fox that "reviews for historical accuracy should be routine when portraying a president's career or legacy." Why not here? | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5875 Registered: 8-2003 |
dave23 -- people on this board said that after seeing Moore's epic. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 2116 Registered: 10-2004  |
its not the same thing cjc. Moores movie is a documentary, presenting the story from his point of view. There was nothing fictionalized, no made up CIA agent calling for a shot that Bush never made. The abc movie is a fiction based on factual events that will serve to confuse anyone looking that these things did occur. It was written to present the Clinton administration and democrats in general in the worst light possible while at the same time boosting as heroic our current administration. The two movies are not equivalent. If you didnt want to see F911 all you had to do was stay home. The ABC movie is going out over PUBLIC airwaves. Huge difference. | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 406 Registered: 3-2006 |
It's also timed for broadcast during the 5 year anniversary, a milestone where collective memory on the subject will be the highest point it's been since the event itself, leaving many people emotionally vulnerable and highly suggestible. Many people will look to television that night as a resource to commemorate and reflect on 9/11. It's therefore an inappropriate time to take license with the facts involved, regardless of which administration one favors. I'm not saying that ABC should screen F911 instead (as Hoops said, the story as told from only one man's view). If there's a need to reimmerse ourselves in the memory of the day, then let the images speak for themselves. Try looking at what's happened (or hasn't happened) for downtown NYC, the nation, and the world since then. Why use the anniversary as an opportunity to manipulate the truth, and people's opinion in the process? | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7868 Registered: 10-2001 |
I see and Michael Moore wasn't attempting to influence an election. Dan Rather wasn't attempting to influence an election. The Reagan film wasn't attempting to to destroy his legacy. Please, timing is everything and ABC has every right to air the damn movie when they want. If it makes the Clinton Administration look like a bunch of jerk offs so be it. Clinton did jack squat about Bin Laden and now he wants to receive credit for being concerned about the Al Qaeda threat? Please. Maybe if Hillary becomes Prez she can rewrite the Clinton legacy. Because as it now stands the Clinton legacy can be summed up in two words, impeachment & Monica. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5783 Registered: 5-2001 |
So it was OK that CBS pulled the Reagan film because of pressure, but not OK for ABC to respond to similar pressure? | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 407 Registered: 3-2006 |
As tom said, the Reagan film was yanked for the exact same reasons (historical revisionism). Why was that acceptable while this isn't? | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7870 Registered: 10-2001 |
There was no prove the Reagan film was accurate. ABC says their film has yet to be completed and is still in the editing process. I will have to view the finished product before comparing. However, if indeed it concludes that Clinton dropped the ball I won't argue since he clearly did. I really can't believe that with all the issues facing America right now, this is the number one concern of the left. An amazingly ignorant group of people. | ||
| dave23 Citizen Username: Dave23 Post Number: 1984 Registered: 5-2001 |
cjc, Ah... yes... "people." I see you've learned a thing or two from Moore. | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 408 Registered: 3-2006 |
There *is* proof that the ABC film is not.
It is? How do you extrapolate that from one discussion focused on that topic? | ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7871 Registered: 10-2001 |
"There *is* proof that the ABC film is not. " Holy ignorance. Have you seen the film yet? No, you haven't. | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 411 Registered: 3-2006 |
Have you? Who has? Where did the allegations come from and why were they reported? Has ABC flat-out denied that the scenes in question exist? | ||
| Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5817 Registered: 10-1999  |
Relax, Mr. Project. The "you-haven't-seen-it-yet" is the fallback smokescreen position. It translates as, "Let's wait to see if ABC takes out the distortions." That essentially agrees that the early version needs to be fixed. In other words, you won that round. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 2118 Registered: 10-2004 |
P37 - why are you continuing to argue using fact and logic? It makes no difference that you are correct, or cogent, or honorable. It is a complete waste of your time and talent. Responding to him only encourages further idiocy. The best you can do with him is post pictures.   | ||
| Project 37 Citizen Username: Project37 Post Number: 412 Registered: 3-2006 |
Nohero and Hoops - cheers for that  | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5785 Registered: 5-2001 |
Every day straw comes up with a line that makes me laugh out loud. Remember the one two days ago about partisan attacks? Today it's
| ||
| Straw Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7873 Registered: 10-2001 |
Oh, you mean Clinton killed Bin Laden when he had the chance? I guessed I missed that? Was that reported on moveon.org? libs.  | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5878 Registered: 8-2003 |
Just a point here -- the film "The Reagans" was aired unaltered on Showtime. Moore's movie contained factual errors as well. Interesting errors. ....continue discussing. | ||
| anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 3047 Registered: 6-2002 |
Did the movie "JFK" have any errors? | ||
| westside Citizen Username: Westside Post Number: 6 Registered: 7-2006 |
I must have missed the part where Moore's movie was broadcast on a television network that relies on public airwaves. That makes all the difference in the world. Moore's movie included no factual errors of any importance. The only thing that Moore haters come up with is the newspaper headline. The rest of the rebuttals are about specious inferrences and differences of opinion. A few were "but Democrats did it too!!!!!1111 nonsense. | ||
| Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5821 Registered: 10-1999 |
The bi-partisan Senate intelligence committee released two reports yesterday showing how flimsy the case for war in Iraq really was. They make Mr. Moore's claims about the Administration seem mild by comparison. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5883 Registered: 8-2003 |
westside -- are you cool with government figures threatening the license of affiliates who broadcast something they disagree with? | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5799 Registered: 5-2001 |
Me, I'm not cool with that. I am, on the other hand, cool about government figures threatening the licenses of affiliates who broadcast false propoganda knowingly. | ||
| Spinal Tap Citizen Username: Spinaltap11 Post Number: 196 Registered: 5-2006  |
You mean like forged memos? | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5801 Registered: 5-2001 |
I believe the evidence for the forged memos, the latest GOP talking point/obsession, came out after the story aired. So "knowingly" doesn't hold up here. ABC still has about 32 hours to make its decision. It has sworn testimony before the 9/11 Commission about certain points of fact which it so far has chosen to dismiss. | ||
| westside Citizen Username: Westside Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2006 |
Thanks Tom, exactly my words. I really don't understand the indignation about the threats to challenge broadcast licenses, the hard right religious Christian movement does it everyday, and I never see objection from Dittobots. | ||
| anon Supporter Username: Anon Post Number: 3056 Registered: 6-2002 |
Moore's movie included no factual errors of any importance. Not true. The scene with Bush reading "My Pet Goat" never happened. It was made up by Moore and the actor playing Bush. By the way the color blindness scene in "Little Miss Sunshine" never really happened. It was just added to the story for dramatic effect. | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1822 Registered: 9-2004 |
"I believe the evidence for the forged memos, the latest GOP talking point/obsession, came out after the story aired. So "knowingly" doesn't hold up here. " TOM...Sorry pal, it was on the net while the show aired. Somebody had the info ready to go prior to the shows airing. I found tons of stuff about the fake Bush NG papers while 60 minutes was still airing. |
