Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 won the Palme d'Or

[Laukev7]

Bush is not a dictator. He sure acts like one, but he is nothing but a puppet. A better term for the current regime would be 'oligarchy' or 'plutocracy'. Bush is certainly a power hungry lunatic, but who's really in charge is the tentacular neoconservative mafia infiltrated in the government and the mass media. One only has to look at the signatures on the PNAC website to get a good sample of those people (though the PNAC is by no means the only organisation to be wary of).

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
Bush is not a dictator. He sure acts like one, but he is nothing but a puppet. A better term for the current regime would be 'oligarchy' or 'plutocracy'. Bush is certainly a power hungry lunatic, but who's really in charge is the tentacular neoconservative mafia infiltrated in the government and the mass media. One only has to look at the signatures on the PNAC website to get a good sample of those people (though the PNAC is by no means the only organisation to be wary of).

whats the "PNAC"?  could you post a link?
  :confused:

[solarismka]

So to get back to what I said before.

I can't wait till that nazi is out of office

Means I can't wait till that Nazi and his party gets out of office.  But does not mean Bush is Hitler, just a really really dumb puppet.  But him being gone would mean people like Ashcroft (Who really is like Hitler) and all the rest of his cronies, rumphiled, condolez rice etc, would be gone too.

Now is that better.

[Calum]

quote:Originally posted by Paladin9:
I really do not like Bush, but I am very sceptical when people say he staged 9/11.  I just really have a hard time buying that.

me too actually, although i think there is little doubt that the cause of the 9/11 attack was initiated/provoked by the USA's foreign policy in the firstplace, intentionally or not.

also, re: Michael Moore, he makes documentaries and is a very level headed journalist. For this reason i think i can trust him a lot more than more sensationalist "journalists", and sources of propaghanda. Moore makes the effort to go the long way round so that whathe produces is factual and plausible. This is why he makes people angry, because they know that when they disagree with him, it is not because he is biased. He may be biased, but he gives you the straight option to see why in his work, and doesn't misrepresent his opinion as the only truth.

I too am looking forward to this new one. interesting to see that everybody in this thread says the same thing. remember a few years ago you couldn't say you liked michael moore or anything like that without dozens of foaming right wingers shouting about how they died in the war for us ungrateful youths and how we should be grateful the USA saw of the pinkos and made the world safe for us? (take a look around suckers)...

[flap]

quote:Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
whats the "PNAC"?  could you post a link?
    :confused:  

See the STFW site for information.

[ June 23, 2004: Message edited by: flap ]

[Calum]

quote:Originally posted by The Stiller:

are you really sure its millions?

so, are you saying it's okay for somebody to be responsible for thousands upon thousands of uneccessarydeaths, just so long as it's not millions?
 

quote:
and most of the people already were pretty racist before the 9/11 thing

most? really? a majority perhaps, but can you really say with conviction that most people were already racist? (or that they are now?) that is pessimism in my opinion, and is also a generalisation which is unfounded. I say this however with no figures to back me up and no experience living in the states, but it just seems unlikely that the whole nation is filled with people who are mostly racist!

 

quote:and by laws that kill freedom im guessing you mean the patriot act. its not really giving them any power they didn't have before.

i suspect this is similar to the anti terrorism act and the terrorism act here in the UK. These acts simply strip away all the civil liberties (yes all, read the acts if you think i am exaggerating!) that we still had after the hideous criminal justice and public order act of 1994. Now, in this country we have no civil liberties at all (no right to free speech, peaceful mass action, freedom of expression, no right to know the name of an officer who stops and searches you etc) because we have no underlying constitution. The govt can simply pass a new law which supercedes any old ones that it contradicts. Perhaps this is one thing the USA's system has in its favour?

i suspect i am digressing...

[Laukev7]

No, you are not digressing, Calum. I STFWed for information about the UK Anti-Terrorism Act, and you're right, it's appalling...

http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/resources/articles/pdfs/terrorism-april-2003.pdf

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
No, you are not digressing, Calum. I STFWed for information about the UK Anti-Terrorism Act, and you're right, it's appalling...

http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/resources/articles/pdfs/terrorism-april-2003.pdf

WoW!  That really is messed!  

[WaWAR_FA]

bush isnt smart enough to pull off something like 9/11

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by WaWAR_BOB:
bush isnt smart enough to pull off something like 9/11

No, bush can't pull off 9/11 all by his lonsome.  But he can with his total goone patrol regime.

Conolez rice, Ashcroft and the like.

Pluse he and his daddy do have connections.  So a single person no.  But as him being the presedent and the people that follow him, then yes he did!  Pluse there is proof now that it was his idea and his making alone.

See ->

URL fixed.

[ June 27, 2004: Message edited by:

[ June 27, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]

[Laukev7]

Bush, no. But they are.

[WaWAR_FA]

....

its things like this that make me stockpile ammo and  MREs...

[WMD]

First of all, Solaris, fix that link.  Now.

 

quote:Originally posted by Calum is NOT a moderator:
These acts simply strip away all the civil liberties that we still had after the hideous criminal justice and public order act of 1994. Now, in this country we have no civil liberties at all (no right to free speech, peaceful mass action, freedom of expression, no right to know the name of an officer who stops and searches you etc)

That sounds highly unlikely.  You don't have any freedom?  Yeah, right.

I read some of the PDF Laukev posted.  What I think the argument is in there, is that much of the Act leaves things very vague, so that they can  *claim* that pretty much anything is terrorist activity.  Right?

Well then, that's all speculation.  You might not have liberties...but you still might.  Go out and try, see what happens.

[Laukev7]

What I think Calum meant is that those freedoms are no longer guaranteed, and nothing prevents the people from being screwed by the government whenever and however they please. That in itself is a huge step behind for a major democratic country.

[ June 27, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]

[WMD]

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking.  However, Calum seems to do what lots of others do: talk about that and make it sound like you live in a police state.  It seems to make the case sound more convincing that the government is evil.

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing.